Although I *might* need 2.8 glass for effectively focusing in the dark
at events that is not the only type of photography I do. I can't see
lugging a 70-200/2.8 around with me all the time even though the
exercise might do me good.
I think the way this will probably play out is that I will first buy
something more generally useful (like the 17-85 range) and see how well
that works in the dark with whatever body/brand I end up with. Only if
that doesn't work will I expend the extra green on fast glass.
Incidentally, I have used the Canon 28-135 IS but only on a D60 and in
inside but fair light conditions. The D60 is not exactly a fast, low
light focusing powerhouse.
I'll have to take a look at Pop Photos review of the Canon 17-85. I've
seen mixed reviews of that lens. Maybe some were bad samples. Many
manufacturers seem to have QC problems these days (especially lenses).
Don't think I've read of that with respect to Olympus, however.
Chuck Norcutt
Moose wrote:
>
> I looked into the 70-200 models. Even the slow one is too heavy for
> everyday duty for me. Like the 300/4.5, it would only go out when I had
> a plan to use it. The f2.8 IS would mostly just sit around on a shelf
> and look pretty around here. A great lens that doesn't get used doesn't
> make great images.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|