Subject: : Re: EOS 70-200 IS
> > Subject: Re: EOS 70-200 IS
> >
> > Jess Lee wrote: 28-135 is usable but slow
> > > and lacking great optical qualities.
> > Have you used the 28-135 IS?
>
I use the 28-135 Is on a regular basis.
>
> It seems pretty darned sharp to me, less
> > distortion than the 28-105, which I have also used.
As I said it is usable, the 28-105 that I owned was not
usable for my needs.
>
>
>
> The biggest advantage of a 70-200 IS f2.8 would be it's
> > ability to be used with a 2x teleconverter, but the combo would put it
> > up in the price range of the 100-400 IS, and it wouldn't be any faster.
>
I don't find teleconverters on a zoom lens to be workable for me,
although
they work fine on my telephotos.
>
> > And if you've seen the size of the glass on the 28-135, 72mm, to
> > maintain a 3.5-5.6 speed with IS, can you imagine the size of a 70-200
> > IS 2.8??
>
The objective size of a lens is usually determined by the ratio of F stop
versus focal length. The super teles are not any larger in the IS verson
compaired to the non IS lens. A 70-200 IS would surely not be any larger
that that sewer pipe Nikon uses for their AFS 80-200 f 2.8 <G>.
>
> Jess Lee
>
> http://www.jessleephotos.com
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
