Thanks for the pics. Errr, let me see... (scratch head). Observation- 1) The higher the ISO = grainer picture. 2) same aperture, hence depth of field are all the same 2) WIth the same f-stop, using IS, one can take it with slower shutter speed, hence more light? Was that Gomer's point? 3) (a) At 1/80 i see some differences between IS or non, but at 1/160 and faster, no diff. (b) At 1/5, IS seems to work well. But at 1/10, non-IS seems sharper than right. Anyway, i guess the point is IS isn't perfect and i better work on my hand-stabilization skills. Hmm, i don't understand how ISO work yet. I guess it's some way to control exposure via sensor sensitivity. But realistically, i don't see why we need it (for non-moving objects)? Won't aperture + shutter speed be enough? Okay, changing aperture would affect depth of field, but shutter speed shouldn't (right?). So, for stale objects, won't finding the right shutter speed (in a fixed aperture) be able to produce the correct exposure?