Hi Robert,
> While for my kind of shooting (tripod & non-moving
> objects) most often I do not need IS or a overlapping
> focal range (I only have a 50 between 35 and 70) this
> would be a great lens, even occensionally for me. I do
> not understand why there is no overlapping between the
> 28-70 and 70-200. For some situation that is really
> annyoing, I think. When you work in the range around
> 70 you too often feel like having to change the lens
> to get the right shot fast. The overlap of the 17-35
> and 28-70 is great. If that just would be true between
> 28-70 and 70-200 many people would feel very happy, I
> think. These people probably would appreciate IS as
> well (they need to change lenses fast so they probably
> neither use a tripod nor monopod).
The solution: use a second body! If I can afford these three lenses
(17-35, 28-70 and 70-200) I think there would be some money left to
get a second body to avoid changing lenses all the time, which is
IMHO more annoying than non-overlapping lenses.
But, of course, I would prefer a 2.8/20-105 over the 28-70...
Bye,
Marco
------------------------------------------------------------
Marco Kost
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.atic.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
