Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: JohnKoerner on September 04, 2009, 09:53:26 am
-
Lost in the hullaballoo over the new 7D is the fact Canon has now come out with an "L" series 100mm macro lens.
Canon claims their new EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM "unrivalled" ...
Can't wait to read the reviews on this one ...
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...p;modelid=19091 (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=155&modelid=19091)
.
-
Apparently, this new macro lens is the very first lens in Canon's lineup to incorporate and all-new kind of image stabilization too.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_p...d=7-10041-10185 (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-10041-10185)
NEW CANON HYBRID IS WORLD’S FIRST IMAGE STABILIZER
TO COMPENSATE FOR TWO TYPES OF CAMERA SHAKE
LAKE SUCCESS, N.Y., July 22, 2009 – Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging, announced today the development of Hybrid Image Stabilizer (IS), the world’s first* optical image stabilization technology that compensates for both angle camera shake and shift camera shake. The technology will be featured in interchangeable single lens reflex (SLR) camera lens planned for commercial release before the end of 2009.
Several different preventative methods and corrective procedures have been introduced to compensate for errors caused by camera shake, which occurs when a camera moves while its shutter is open and its image sensor is exposed to light.
Canon began researching methods to compensate for camera shake in the 1980s, and in 1995 launched the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, the world’s first interchangeable SLR camera lens to feature a mechanism that compensates for optical camera shake. Since then, the company has continued to produce a variety of interchangeable lenses with image stabilization capabilities, and boasts a total of 21 such lenses in its current product lineup.
Canon’s newly developed Hybrid IS technology optimally compensates for angle and shift camera shake. Sudden changes in camera angle can significantly affect images taken during standard shooting, whereas shift-based shaking, which occurs when a camera moves parallel to the imaging scene, is more pronounced in macro photography and other close-range shooting.
The new Hybrid IS technology incorporates an angular velocity sensor that detects the extent of angle-based shaking and is found in all previous Canon optical image stabilizer mechanisms, as well as a new acceleration sensor that determines the amount of shift-based camera shake. Hybrid IS also employs a newly developed algorithm that synthesizes information from the two sensors to make optimal adjustments, thereby dramatically enhancing the effects of image stabilization during shooting, including macro shooting, which had proven difficult for conventional image stabilization technologies.
Canon is actively engaged in ongoing research and development of interchangeable SLR camera lenses incorporating Hybrid IS technology, and is aiming for the early commercialization and inclusion of the lenses in a wide range of products.
....
.
.
-
Lost in the hullaballoo over the new 7D is the fact Canon has now come out with an "L" series 100mm macro lens.
I wouldn't say it was lost, just a lot less interest. This is the third generation of the 100 Macro from Canon and it's not nearly as important in the market as the 7D.
The previous generation 100M is a standard for sharpness and quality, though also known for slow focus that often 'hunts.' It's widely used as a portrait lens.
Adding L glass and IS will be mute points if the auto focus hasn't been improved.
Better than Zeiss ? That'll be subjective, both are great lenses.
-
May I ask why fast AF is important for a macro lens? Is the idea that you would be photographing small fast-moving insects? Just trying to understand here ...
-
IS in a macro lens! I guess my Tokina 100mm Macro is up for sale! Hope the Canon has good Bokeh.
Marc
-
there are a couple of reasons for wanting reasonably fast autofocus in the 100 macro, not all related to macrophotography
- photographing insects is one, but the the 100M is a great lens for photographing small fish underwater and focus speed is important
- f2.8 is reasonably fast for a 100mm lens and the optical quality of the lens makes it very desirable as a general purpose short telephoto - if it would focus faster
-
I wouldn't say it was lost, just a lot less interest. This is the third generation of the 100 Macro from Canon and it's not nearly as important in the market as the 7D.
Perhaps. But I would beg to differ on the issue of importance. The fact is, camera bodies change with much more frequency than do lenses, so the advent of a "new camera" is a yearly thing, while the advent of a new generation lens can sometimes take more than a decade. More than this, Canon invented image stabilization to begin with, and now they have launched a "new generation" of image stabilization again, which means they are once again leading the way with innovation while everyone else plays catch-up.
Further still, with the sensor technology of camera bodies getting to a point that older-generation lenses are starting to get exposed as "flawed," the fact that Canon is now backing-up their incredible new-generation cameras with new-generation glass to go with it is exciting news for those invested in Canon. The 100mm USM IS macro is the first step in this new technology, which quite frankly I feel is every bit as important (arguably more so) than a new body.
I am willing to bet that a new-age Canon 100-400 zoom (long overdue) is soon to come out also, with this latest technology, which is something I too have been waiting for.
The previous generation 100M is a standard for sharpness and quality, though also known for slow focus that often 'hunts.' It's widely used as a portrait lens.
Agreed. I love my copy.
Adding L glass and IS will be mute points if the auto focus hasn't been improved.
I disagree. I seldom use autofocus for macro, if ever. The only exception to this would be species identification, where I want to first "document" seeing a new species of insect with a quick (and halfway decent) shot ... before I settle in and really try to nail it with a manual focus attempt.
Better than Zeiss ? That'll be subjective, both are great lenses.
Well, it will be better than Zeiss on many levels: (1) Autofocus, of which Zeiss has none; (2) true 1:1 macro ability, of which Zeiss has none; and (3) the new image stabilization, of which no other company has a peer. Whether the actual sharpness and bokeh can equal a Zeiss remains to be seen, but if the Canon is on a par with Zeiss here, then it will be by far the better lens, for less money too.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
IS in a macro lens! I guess my Tokina 100mm Macro is up for sale! Hope the Canon has good Bokeh.
Marc
Mine are already up for sale Marc
Jack
.
-
Well, it will be better than Zeiss on many levels: (1) Autofocus, of which Zeiss has none; (2) true 1:1 macro ability, of which Zeiss has none; and (3) the new image stabilization, of which no other company has a peer. Whether the actual sharpness and bokeh can equal a Zeiss remains to be seen, but if the Canon is on a par with Zeiss here, then it will be by far the better lens, for less money too.
Using a Sony Alpha 850 or 900 with the good old Sony Alpha (exMinolta) 100/2.8 Macro is another fine combination. Instead of the Canon lens IS you get the Sony SteadyShot INSIDE™ to "offer up to 4.0 steps anti-shake performance with ALL lenses".
http://photo.net/equipment/sony/100macro/ (http://photo.net/equipment/sony/100macro/)
-
I agree. The SONY 100 Macro is an equal to the second generation Canon.
I'll be buying an A850 just for the Zeiss lenses offered for it. I think we'll be seeing more Zeiss glass for SONY next year.
I shot with Leica Rs for years and the Zeiss 100 is amazing. All they have to do is change the mount and add autofocus.
-
I agree. The SONY 100 Macro is an equal to the second generation Canon.
LOL!
How can you say that? The Canon hasn't been released yet!
-
LOL!
How can you say that? The Canon hasn't been released yet!
The LOL is on you. The new L IS 100M lens is the third generation. I was referring to, as you quoted me, the second generation.
-
I own the old Canon 100 macro and it is in deed one very sharp prime.
One issue that is an upgrade question for me is that the "old" version has a 58mm filter size. The new "L" 100 macro has a 67mm filter size. My guess is that my Canon MR-14X flash ring will not fit the new lens. An new lens requiring a new flash might be an expensive upgrade.
Bud
-
Using a Sony Alpha 850 or 900 with the good old Sony Alpha (exMinolta) 100/2.8 Macro is another fine combination. Instead of the Canon lens IS you get the Sony SteadyShot INSIDE™ to "offer up to 4.0 steps anti-shake performance with ALL lenses".
http://photo.net/equipment/sony/100macro/ (http://photo.net/equipment/sony/100macro/)
No doubt, I have seen some wonderful shots taken with Sony/Minolta macros.
I myself am very happy with my Canon 50D and 100mm combo. The only reservations I've had have been with the so-so weather sealing of the 50D, and the pretty cheap 'feel' of the 100mm macro, but performance-wise I have been very pleased with both.
It is my belief that the 7D combined with an 'L' level 100mm macro will cover all the bases I need covered and satisfy me for many, many years to come.
.
-
It is my belief that the 7D combined with an 'L' level 100mm macro will cover all the bases I need covered and satisfy me for many, many years to come.
or at least until next year!
-
I own the old Canon 100 macro and it is in deed one very sharp prime.
One issue that is an upgrade question for me is that the "old" version has a 58mm filter size. The new "L" 100 macro has a 67mm filter size. My guess is that my Canon MR-14X flash ring will not fit the new lens. An new lens requiring a new flash might be an expensive upgrade.
Bud
I use a Canon step up ring to adapt the MR-14X to the 180 Macro, which is 72mm. I'm sure they'll have one for the new 100M.
The 180M, by the way, makes the second gen 100M pale by comparison. It redefines sharp.
-
The new L IS 100M lens is the third generation. I was referring to, as you quoted me, the second generation.
Ahh.. my bad.. Apologies I did not realise this is the third iteration of the 100mm.
I must say the MTF for this new lens is pretty amazing - certainly interested in seeing some samples.
-
I see it's listed on Yodobashi Camera for ￥113,400. They give you 10% points for it, so you could effectively take 10% off the price.
http://www.yodobashi.com/ec/product/100000...J_eLAGdzbt0ah0I (http://www.yodobashi.com/ec/product/100000001001150643/index.html?backquery=PJLeF2WoOEmdMn-maNMnAyeWdIdfrH4i0ZSHSUHpxWwkUau6qfMIIFDsio-7FEHr9MD2NHkzjBE5SDzSx3RsaOzJoM4p3P0ICHMMNaHuaR55SSqSXx4oup74foN9J_eLAGdzbt0ah0I).
For that money it might be worth buying, if the optical quality is up to scratch. As has already been said, it could be a good portrait lens, even if it's designed for macro work. Does anyone know if there's a disadvantage to using a macro lens for shooting distant objects?
-
[quote name='JohnKoerner' date='Sep 4 2009, 09:06 PM' post='308395']
>>Well, it will be better than Zeiss on many levels: (1) Autofocus, of which Zeiss has none; (2) true 1:1 macro ability, of which Zeiss has none; <<
The Zeiss Makro Sonnar for the Contax SLR mount actually does focus to 1:1. I know, since I owned one and a bunch of other Zeiss glass up to time I foolishly sold all of it in the early 2000's.
-
I own the old Canon 100 macro and it is in deed one very sharp prime.
One issue that is an upgrade question for me is that the "old" version has a 58mm filter size. The new "L" 100 macro has a 67mm filter size. My guess is that my Canon MR-14X flash ring will not fit the new lens. An new lens requiring a new flash might be an expensive upgrade.
Bud
I have the MT-24 Ringlight Flash and I am sure Canon will put out an adapter ring to match the fit as they do with the 180mm.
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
I use a Canon step up ring to adapt the MR-14X to the 180 Macro, which is 72mm. I'm sure they'll have one for the new 100M.
The 180M, by the way, makes the second gen 100M pale by comparison. It redefines sharp.
Exactly.
One thing I am curious about also is whether or not Canon will soon come out with another-generation 180mm 'L' macro with this new IS technology. It almost makes me want to slow down a minute and wait and see, since the added distance-to-shoot would be well worth the wait to get the bigger lens this time ...
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
or at least until next year!
Ha ha!
Actually, I am well satisfied with the equipment I have ... but with the reservations mentioned. If my 50D had the features (and especially the weather sealing) of the 7D I would not be inclined to upgrade. If my 100mm macro were 'L'-quality in build I would never get rid of it. The 7D is the exact kind of camera I want, the 50D is close. The 100mm 'L' is the exact kind of macro I want, the non-'L' is close but feels a little cheap.
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
The Zeiss Makro Sonnar for the Contax SLR mount actually does focus to 1:1. I know, since I owned one and a bunch of other Zeiss glass up to time I foolishly sold all of it in the early 2000's.
It is my understanding that the elder Zeiss/Contax macros were, yes, 1:1 in ratio. However, the current ones are not:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4725...#specifications (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/472574-REG/Zeiss_1424_665_100mm_f_2_ZF_Manual.html#specifications)
Were the Zeiss a 1:1 lens, qualitatively it would be the exact kind of lens I would love to own forever. Just read the reviews on the Zeiss and it makes you want to buy one immediately. It is my hope that this new Canon 'L' lens will be comparable to the Zeiss in quality, both in build as well as in performance, but that it will have the extra advantage of autofocus (which occasionally is critical in macro, before a subject departs), the new IS technology, as well as a true 1:1 magnification.
Jack
.
.
-
This is great news and I've already put a deposit down at Mifsuds in the UK, although it hurts that once again the price is virtually US dollar for GB pound parity. At least I'll be defraying the cost by selling off my 85mm 1.2 (too heavy, no IS), 135mm 2.0 (no IS), and 180mm Macro (exquisite IQ, but only if tripod mounted).
I wonder if this, plus the recent launch of the 14mm MkII and 18mm/24mm T&S lenses, gives us any clues as to future Canon bodies and sensors? If many of the current lens line-up is already challenged by the 5D MkII and 1Ds MkIII, then it makes perfect sense for Canon to upgrade some old warhorse lenses before they became embarrassed by the potential resolution of, say, a 30+MPX 1Ds MkIV? Personally in the digital era I'd happily trade off a stop of aperture for better IQ in a lighter lens, and although I appreciate that IS isn't a perfect substitute for wider apertures in all cases, it certainly is in many cases.
Hopefully this won't be the end of the Canon lens developments, a 28mm 2.0L IS would be a wonderful thing!
-
This is great news and I've already put a deposit down at Mifsuds in the UK, although it hurts that once again the price is virtually US dollar for GB pound parity. At least I'll be defraying the cost by selling off my 85mm 1.2 (too heavy, no IS), 135mm 2.0 (no IS), and 180mm Macro (exquisite IQ, but only if tripod mounted).
I agree, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if you see the same upgrade in the 180mm macro also ...
I wonder if this, plus the recent launch of the 14mm MkII and 18mm/24mm T&S lenses, gives us any clues as to future Canon bodies and sensors? If many of the current lens line-up is already challenged by the 5D MkII and 1Ds MkIII, then it makes perfect sense for Canon to upgrade some old warhorse lenses before they became embarrassed by the potential resolution of, say, a 30+MPX 1Ds MkIV?
That is exactly what I think is happening ...
Personally in the digital era I'd happily trade off a stop of aperture for better IQ in a lighter lens, and although I appreciate that IS isn't a perfect substitute for wider apertures in all cases, it certainly is in many cases.
Hopefully this won't be the end of the Canon lens developments, a 28mm 2.0L IS would be a wonderful thing!
According to the literature on this new 100mm macro you get to have your cake and eat it too: the new-era IS is supposed to be able to generate a FOUR-stop advantage, while the optics provide better IQ as well ... so I suppose, in time, we'll see
Jack
.
-
Good point Eric. I can't really see the obvious point either. However it would make the lens more useful/versatile for non macro work. I know the existing 100mm non L series macro works well at infinity.
-
Good point Eric. I can't really see the obvious point either.
Interesting way to put your words. I am not quite sure how one fails to see a point while at the same time acknowledges its being 'obvious'? I would think that one either sees something obvious or that a point escapes the viewer
I suppose the "obvious point" of upgrading to an L-quality macro lens would depend on the needs/wants of the prospective photographer. If a photographer doesn't personally shoot macro, or seldom does, the point of such an upgrade would be not much. If a photographer only used his existing macro for simple indoor studio portraiture, on a tripod, the point might likewise be lost.
However, if the greatest majority of a photographer's work and interest in photography comes from macro shooting outdoors in the constantly-upredictable settings of nature ... and if that photographer had the opportunity to improve his hand-held shooting dramatically by a new-generation image-stabilization technology ... increasing up to 4 stops ... with the added protection of L-quality weather-sealing ... while adding an improved focusing ring which matured from being flimsy and loose to being tighter and much more precise ... I think the "obvious point" of making an upgrade would be crystal clear.
However it would make the lens more useful/versatile for non macro work.
I believe the transformation of this lens, dare I say its very 'macro' name, implies that its primary use is for macro work.
I know the existing 100mm non L series macro works well at infinity.
That is an added benefit to this macro lens, true, but it is not its primary function.
Jack
.
-
I suppose the "obvious point" of upgrading to an L-quality macro lens would depend on the needs/wants of the prospective photographer.
The original Canon 100mm macro lens has always had a well deserved reputation. Optically is has always been first rate. The lack of L designation is due to the not quite indestructible build, not the optics. And as far as I know there have been few complaints if any about the build, so the L designation is pretty much marketing.
-
The original Canon 100mm macro lens has always had a well deserved reputation. Optically is has always been first rate. The lack of L designation is due to the not quite indestructible build, not the optics. And as far as I know there have been few complaints if any about the build, so the L designation is pretty much marketing.
I agree with you on the optics issue, as I love my Canon 100mm macro, but as an owner the build quality is a bit light and plasticky IMO. While it could be argued that the lens' being light creates greater ease-of-use for the photographer out in the field, when compared to a Zeiss 100mm macro, for example, it feels like a toy.
While high-quality optics is a "bottom line" requirement for a lens, sometimes it's nicer to feel everything about the lens is top-notch. More than just the nicety of an 'L' feel, however, my primary interest as to what goes with the 'L' design upgrade is the addition of weather-proofing as well as image stabilization. Moreover, the way the wording is on Canon's website regarding this lens ... "the highest quality optics available" ... it seems to me that there is an implication that there has been an elevation in design here too.
Of course, all of this remains to be seen, but I do get the sense that this new 100mm macro is going to be much more than a "marketing" design, that the bar has been raised yet again, and in fact this lense will prove to be an outstanding piece of equipment.
We'll see ...
.
-
Nikon has had a VR (Nikonese for IS) 105 Macro for several years now, and I love mine, and find the VR really useful. It doesn't help at 1:1, but it IS useful in the "closeup" range around 1:5, where I find the 105's image quality to be superb. Anyway, if this Canon is as nice as its Nikon counterpart, it'll be a great lens, and a great hole for Cann to fill (Attention, Nikon - how about filling some of YOUR holes in the longer part of the range?
-Dan
-
I agree with you on the optics issue, as I love my Canon 100mm macro, but as an owner the build quality is a bit light and plasticky IMO. While it could be argued that the lens' being light creates greater ease-of-use for the photographer out in the field, when compared to a Zeiss 100mm macro, for example, it feels like a toy.
I'll accept what you say about the build. As to whether in practice the old lens is fragile, it is probably more than good enough for most users. But, I won't argue your points.
While high-quality optics is a "bottom line" requirement for a lens, sometimes it's nicer to feel everything about the lens is top-notch. More than just the nicety of an 'L' feel, however, my primary interest as to what goes with the 'L' design upgrade is the addition of weather-proofing as well as image stabilization. Moreover, the way the wording is on Canon's website regarding this lens ... "the highest quality optics available" ... it seems to me that there is an implication that there has been an elevation in design here too.
Of course, all of this remains to be seen, but I do get the sense that this new 100mm macro is going to be much more than a "marketing" design, that the bar has been raised yet again, and in fact this lense will prove to be an outstanding piece of equipment.
We'll see ...
.
Ah, no I didn't say the new lens is no more than marketing. It is quite the opposite. As you say the IS makes it more usable for many. And it dose have better build. My point was that the L designation, whilst having substance, is a clever marketing strategy. It is a way to bring the user's attention to extra features e.g. better build, and to create a sense of something more than the whole. In the same way Canon branded the ASIC in their cameras ie. DIGIC, and lo and behold Canon uses have long discussions about DIGIC. Nikon and others caught on, and we now have Expeed, Bionz and so on.
Regarding the image quality there is a widespread opinion among Nikon users that turning on VR reduces image quality albeit ever so slightly, compared to shooting with a tripod. This might be true of the Canon IS. I do not use Canon so I cannot comment. But this is a digression.
-
I'll accept what you say about the build. As to whether in practice the old lens is fragile, it is probably more than good enough for most users. But, I won't argue your points.
Perception vs. reality. The build quality of the Canon 100 has never been an issue.
Read any threads with someone saying theirs broke ?
Regarding the image quality there is a widespread opinion among Nikon users that turning on VR reduces image quality albeit ever so slightly, compared to shooting with a tripod. This might be true of the Canon IS. I do not use Canon so I cannot comment. But this is a digression.
Both IS and VR move the lens elements to correct for camera movement. It seems plausible that compared to a totally locked down lens and camera there could be some reduction in image quality.
-
I'll accept what you say about the build. As to whether in practice the old lens is fragile, it is probably more than good enough for most users. But, I won't argue your points.
It's mostly the focusing ring that feels flimsy and fast, rather than sturdy and tight. Kind of like the difference between a "power steering" wheel on a car versus a tight non-power-steering feel ...
Ah, no I didn't say the new lens is no more than marketing. It is quite the opposite. As you say the IS makes it more usable for many. And it dose have better build. My point was that the L designation, whilst having substance, is a clever marketing strategy. It is a way to bring the user's attention to extra features e.g. better build, and to create a sense of something more than the whole. In the same way Canon branded the ASIC in their cameras ie. DIGIC, and lo and behold Canon uses have long discussions about DIGIC. Nikon and others caught on, and we now have Expeed, Bionz and so on.
Gotta give consumers a reason to buy ...
Regarding the image quality there is a widespread opinion among Nikon users that turning on VR reduces image quality albeit ever so slightly, compared to shooting with a tripod. This might be true of the Canon IS. I do not use Canon so I cannot comment. But this is a digression.
I don't think there is anything that will enhance the image quality of a 1:1 shot taken with precise focus on a tripod ... but the issue is more like what Dan Wells said, whereby a hand-held 1:5 shot ... that would have been blown withOUT the image-stabilization (vibration reduction) technology due to hand-shake ... can now be salvaged with it. Surely this has value. Let's face it, how many shots of wildlife can't really wait for exact tripod placement and manipulation beofre the moment is lost? How many shots get blown in the attempt to do so? Fungus and flowers may wait for us, but how about insects and butterflies? In some cases yes; in some cases no. Hand-holding a macro allows for greater flexibility, so new technology allowing for less wasted hand-held attempts and more 'keepers' in trying to capture fleeting situations certainly is worth the extra dinero to somone who really enjoys macro work.
Speaking of which, nice shots on your fungi collection. I have recently taken an interest in this also. Never really thought about it before, but happened to see an interesting specimen a month or so ago, and have since developed quite a fascination for them. I hadn't realized the extent of the diversity of species. I live on 50 acres in Florida and have found at least 40 different species already ... properly-identifying them hasn't been quite so easy though ...
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
Perception vs. reality. The build quality of the Canon 100 has never been an issue.
Read any threads with someone saying theirs broke ?
Put your hands on a Zeiss 100mm, and turn the focus ring, and then put your hands on the Canon (non-L) and turn the focus ring, and your perception and reality that the Canon feels like a cheap toy by comparison will be the same as mine. Whether the lens breaks all the time is not the issue (mine works extremely well and has never given me anything but sharp images).
I guess it's like comparing the inside of a Toyota Corolla versus the inside of a BMW. Sure the Toyota will get you from Point A to Point B, and the dashboard may never break or rot, but that doesn't change the fact the interior components of the former are made out of cheap plastics and look-n-feel "cheap" ... while the interior components of the latter are made of fine leather and wood and look-n-feel nice.
Doesn't mean the Toyota can't take you to the same places as the BMW can take you ... and last you a long time ... but it will never be as pleasurable a ride. After all, isn't that why Toyota has its own "L"-series also, namely Lexus, for people who enjoy luxury?
Both IS and VR move the lens elements to correct for camera movement. It seems plausible that compared to a totally locked down lens and camera there could be some reduction in image quality.
Exactly. No need to use these features on a totally locked-down tripod shot ... but when creeping around looking for a candid hand-held shot of a rare butterfly in Peru, having the added security of IS/VR might well make the difference between being able to keep your only opportunity of a rare species about to take wing and missing it because of hand-shake ...
Jack
.
-
"Low friction ceramic balls support the moving elements, which allows for the amazingly smooth movement "
Wow I wish I could get a set of them.
Kevin.
-
"Low friction ceramic balls support the moving elements, which allows for the amazingly smooth movement "
Wow I wish I could get a set of them.
Kevin.
Actually, ceramic balls are now the preferred elements in high-tech roller blades, as well as many other mechanical devices that provide any type of rotary or linear motion. Ceramic balls provide higher stiffness, lower thermal expansion, lighter weight, increased corrosion resistance, and higher electrical resistance than comparable steel products do.
So you might want to save your smug little winks until you actually know what you're talking about
Jack
.