[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote/replied to:
>I frequently use an early 28-70 non L lens that was discontinued about 10
>years ago. I picked up the lens used. It's non- USM but fast focusing, and
>the barrel rotates and sinks into the outer barrel, which can be problem with
>some filters. However, the
I thought the discontinued 70-210mm f3.5-4.5 USM was
supposed to be a pretty good lens. Why did they get
rid of it and replace it with junk?
John Lovda
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I had the same thought. I wish Canon made a couple
> of more lenses in the
> 70-200 F4 L type. High quality, mode
I frequently use an early 28-70 non L lens that was discontinued about 10
years ago. I picked up the lens used. It's non- USM but fast focusing, and
the barrel rotates and sinks into the outer barrel, which can be problem with
some filters. However, the lens is solid, very compact, and very goo
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: New EOS lens announced
> I had the same thought. I wish Canon made a couple of more lenses in the
> 70-200 F4 L type. High quality, moderate cos
I had the same thought. I wish Canon made a couple of more lenses in the
70-200 F4 L type. High quality, moderate cost, moderate weight and bulk. A
28-80 F4 L of similar quality would be terrific.
*
***
***
* For list instruction
> I find this statement to be the most intersting:
>
> "There is some new technology the EF
> 28-105mm USM has a
> new micro motor which is more compact than previous
> versions."
One by one all of the top level consumer lenses are
dropping away being replaced by junk. There will be
n
