On Friday July 9 2004 4:18 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I second this request. When shooting film, I found a 28-135 is a great one > lens on the camera when going light was required. Otherwise, I would take a > 28-70 and 100-400 is. With the 10D, nothing provides this general use > coverage. I would love a digital only 28-105(135) coverage, at a constant > F4 to reduce weight, size and cost. L quality optics and construction in > the price range of the 70-200 F4 or 17-40mm.
You don't want much, do ya? :) Fred -- "Ballmer is no more designed for the art of persuasion than the Abrams tank is for delivering meals on wheels." * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
