> That said, I personally would never buy the 28-135 IS--it is simply
> too slow for my way of working, IS or no IS, and it is too big and
> heavy to use as a backpacking lens. Also, I don't much care for the
> IS effect in the viewfinder, although I suppose one gets accustomed
> to it.
What do you take for backpacking, then? I bought this lens
specifically *for* backpacking in spite of its slowness, because
I've found that I'm not that excited at having to switch between
my existing fixed lenses in this range -- 28/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8.
I also like the fact that this lens can share filters with the
200/2.8 (which I have) and the 20/2.8 (which I don't (yet)).
I have to admit that I've only had the lens for a week and haven't
yet taken it for a spin. The five developed photos that I've
taken seem to meet my expectations for sharpness at 4" by 6".
I'm also more interested in people and landscapes than in
wildlife per se.
--
Curt Hagenlocher
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
