F. Craig Callahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that one of the things that gets lost in these kinds of discussions is > that none of us can see the photographs on which each person is basing his or > her argument. Without being able to see the photos in question, for me or anyone > else to say that a lens is terrific or is crap has to be treated by the reader > as pure subjectivity. What standards are the participants applying? What one > person may find "good enough" or even excellent, another might find completely > unacceptable. So if someone says a lens is pretty good and someone else says > it's a waste of money, both could be correct. What you demand from your work has > a lot to do with what lenses you find acceptable for that work. And most people > like what they use (or else they'd be using something else). > > fcc Craig makes a very valid point, and certainly one I've wondered about, particularly with the 75-300 IS. I didn't doubt Skip's reactions to his experience with this lens, I've read similar reactions often. Heck, I read them before I bought the lens. I do have 4 enlargements taken handheld with this lens up at my wall at work, so if I'm uncritical, I'm willing to share it. Bill Jameson * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
