Pierre Bellavance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And I will also use the lens for travel photos, like in NYC or Paris where
> the zoom lens would probably be more useful than the 20/2.8 lens. I guess
> it's hard to move forward or backwards from the top of the Empire State or
> the World Trade Center or the Eiffel Tower...
>
> Are there any advantages left for the 20/2.8?
Seems like more people have/had to make this difficult decision. I see
you own a 28-135. I own a 28-105, and was also thinking: "I already have
the 28-35 part of the zoom".
Although a zoom is more versatile I really like (or even love) my fixed
20mm. It's solid, sharp and has much less distortion at 20mm for what I
observed while using the 20-35 USM from a friend. Believe me on the
Eifel tower you can make a step forward/backward for a better
composition. Never been to NY, but I guess you can do this also on the
WTC :)
See some travel pictures taken with my EF20mm here:
http://home.wanadoo.nl/erwin.harkink/Photo/Paris.html
A nice close focus picture here:
http://home.wanadoo.nl/erwin.harkink/Photo/Scandinavia.html
And maybe you decide to make some landscape pictures also:
http://home.wanadoo.nl/erwin.harkink/Photo/Tenerife.html
Let us know what you bought!
Bye,
Erwin
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
