On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 08:21:34 +0100, you wrote:
>And then I have the shitty 75-300 mm as an emergency option
>in my bag, that I used exactly two times last year when I
>needed to bridge distance for newspaper work. I very
>rarely need focal lengthes over 85 mm, I'm more the guy
>closing in on his subjects. For newspaper work the 75-300
>is acceptable
Why do you *insist* on dissing this lens in a less intelligent manner
than the rest of your often-informative posts? We heard you the first
time. Some of us are trying to make the best possible photographs we
can on a less expansive budget, and are trying to learn as much as
possible from people likje yourself who impart a lot of valuable
information on this group. I am also shooting dozens of rolls of film
in an effort to improve my skills, not just talking about it here.
When I keep hearing someone tell me the stuff I'm using is "crap" andf
"shitty" it's tiresome, and I stop listening to you. Especially when
I find out you use it yourself. I *know* it's a not an L lens, and I
imagine we all know that. What would be helpful is if you would
post some ways to get the best out of this lens, instead of constantly
swearing at it.
Ken
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
