In a message dated 12/16/2000 10:46:39 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All this talk of the non-existent 70-200 IS makes me
want to mention the lens I really wish Canon made:
a 28-105 f2.8 constant aperture
After spending a few days in Rome, I feel like there
were a lot of times the 28-135 just was too slow, even
with IS. But the 28-70 just has too small a zoom
range for my taste.
I'd happily accept quality equal to that of the
28-135, which should make the lens more manageable
than an L quality lens. And yes, I know it would be
big and bulky. I'll willingly put up with that.
But it would be a very, very useful lens, even without IS.
Bob,
My answer to the non-existent lens you'd like to have, is the Canon 70-200 f
4 L lens. Although not quite wide angle enough, this lens is rapidly
becoming my favorite "walk around" lens in settings you describe. It's fast,
sharp, light-weight, and very versatile. With that on my camera, and the
20-35mm (non-L) in one pocket and the 50mm 1.8 in the other pocket, I've got
most situations covered with relatively little expense and very little
weight. If I have a third pocket, the 1.4 tc gives me 320mm at 5.6. To go
from 20mm to 320mm in such a light weight package and so cheaply is somewhat
miraculous, IMO.
Ann Williams
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
