> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Fred Miller > Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 11:35 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: EOS Another new lens to test :-) > > > On Tuesday August 10 2004 1:27 pm, Scott Laird wrote: > > On Aug 10, 2004, at 7:40 AM, James B.Davis wrote: > > >> Anyway, it seems like you're speaking from zero personal experience > > >> (except "friends" and "pros") so there's really no point in > > >> discussing this any further. Because at f/2.8, the L lens is much > > >> superior to the IS. :-) > > > > > > It sounds like you're speaking from L lens lust :-) But you are WRONG. > > > > > > You really should check the Photodo rating of these two lenses side by > > > side. It's a pity though they couldn't rate the 28-70 above 70mm :-) > > > > FWIW, I had a 28-135 IS and a 85/1.8 as my primary lenses on my D60 for > > a while. I sold the 28-135 after I realized that *every one* of my > > favorite shots had come from the 85/1.8. I replaced the 28-135 with a > > 24-70L, and now I never use the 85/1.8. > > > > IS is nice, but it works better when it's attached to good glass. > > > > YMMV, and maybe I had a particularly bad sample, but I'm a lot happier > > with the 24-70. Most of the time, I'd rather have the 4mm at the wide > > end then the 65mm at the long end. > > Hang onto the 85mm, Scott, as you may in the future need to or > want to do high > quality portraits. Even thought the 100mm macro is great for > that, and so is > the 24-70L, the 85mm IS THE portrait lens!! The BEST 3 made are: Canon, > Nikon, and Minolta. > > Fred > > Fred >
I don't know Fred, Maybe in the current crop of modern AF lenses (last 10 years or so), but I took a LOT of incredible images with Nikon 105's back in the day... Cheers/Ship * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
