usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> The 70-300 may have your name, errrr, picture on it: scroll down a tad.
>
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/Canon-70-300mm.shtml
>
Yes, thanks, I've seen that pic of my cousin. :-)
>
> The DO's look like good performers in a quite small package.
>
> I can't get off square one on deciding on a AF lens for a 5D---no time to
> think for a few weeks yet.
> Will likely use it as digital film for Zuikos for awhile unless swing for the
> double rebate for a 24-105 f4 IS.
>
I still don't get it. The C 24-85/3.5-4.5 (The first lens I bought
(used) for the 300D) or the 35-105/3.5-4.5 (The first AF lens I used
(borrowed) on the 300D.) are each half the weight and 20-30% of the
price. And both are quite good lenses. Assuming one is going to have a
long zoom and maybe something wider, pick one or the other to fit.
And I'm still very happy with my Tamron 28-300 Di. If 300 mm is just too
dizzying, there's the 28-200.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|