----- Original Message -----
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 10:29 PM
Subject: EOS Advice on Canon Zooms
> I have narrowed my decision to either the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 or the 28-135
> f/3.5-5.6 IS. I'm looking for opinions on either of these two. Does
either
> one have perform significantly better then the other? Does the "IS"
really
> work? Does it degrade the image when in use?
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
Hi Richard, I had the 24-85 and now I have the 28-135 IS. The 28-135 IS is a
lot better. 24 is ok but 85 all ways isn�t long, you ever need some more.
The IS realy work I can shot ate 1/4 handheld without blur. I had the 28-70
II 3.5-4.5 too and this one are the best. If you can�t have the L one this
is the lens it are optcaly superior than the other 2 but it isn�t USM, front
element rotetes and retract at the long and low end, so this dificult the
use of filters.
Today I have one travel kit that is 20 2.8, 28-135 IS, 200 2.8 L, kenko 300
pro 1.4x and canon 2X. All 72 and the kenko TC i can use for emegency with
the 28-135 too.
Fred
Frederico Samarane
Belo Horizonte - MG
30.575-100
Brazil
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (palm)
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
