JimD wrote:
>
> Ken's perspective has me thinking that the 28-70 is enough
> better than the 28-105 that the 28-70 may be the right step
> to take at this time.
> The comparison on Ian Porteous' site still gives me
> pause though.
> http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Falls/6122/test/test2/lens.html
> -JimD
If I were you, I would hold off on the 28-70. It is a great lens, and I
love mine, but if you're happy with your 28-105, and you tend to use it
at middle apertures or high apertures, then I would skip the 28-70. If,
however, you find yourself constantly using the 28-105 wide open, then
the 28-70 might be a good choice, as it offers a wider max f/stop and is
quite sharp on the wide end.
One reason I would hold off on the 28-70 is that it is an old lens, and
you never know when it is going to be replaced, perhaps with an IS
version. And of course, once it is replaced, that will drive down the
value on the old one.
Still, I wouldn't trade my 28-70 for the world. But I probably use my
100 macro more--and it makes a great medium speed portrait lens.
Mike
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
