In a follow up to my own post, I was wondering if anyone had a Canon 28-200
and how it might compare to other lenses. For example, it only costs about
450 or so versus 1700 or so for the 35-350L. While I do not expect it to be
as good, how would it compare to the 100-300L for example which is an older
lens available for about the same money. (if anyone happened to have both).
Or, how does it compare to the 28-135IS which I have which is a very good
consumer grade lens (rated a 3.5 on photodo).
I have tried the 100-400IS L and the 35-350L (in the store) but I believe
both are too heavy for a travel lens although both are great lenses.
Specifically, I was thinking of a good lens for going with the kids to Disney.
With a D30, the effective range of the 28-200 would be 45-320 or so, a
pretty nice travel lens. With a 28-70 L, it would make a great combination
with low light capability.
At 09:29 AM 2/19/01, I wrote:
>Has anyone had any experience with the new Canon 28-200? It sounds like a
>good travel lens?
Bill White
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
