Jeff, here's another one of those replies from someone who has never seen
either o the items you asked about, but has a comment (an an opinion, of
course).
The body you're referring to is the Rebel IIs, the methods by which it works
always seemed suspect to me, but I"ve no experience.
<start of opinion>To me the 135 has a big advantage because it frees you to
buy a more modern body, like the2000 or 7e.</end of opinion>
Tom P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeffrey Higa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 3:44 PM
Subject: EOS Soft Focus options
> Hi,
> I currently own a Rebel G and am starting to take a lot of protrait
> shots of people using either my 100mm EF (old style) Macro or my 28-135
> IS. I always mount the camera to an old Vivitar bracket and use
> available light with a 380 EX flash + Sto-Fen Onmi bounce for fill.
>
> I've been trying a variety of soft-focus filters and have been
> dissatisfied with the results (I'm also tired of buying those filters).
> I remember reading on the list that there is a Rebel body (the II?) that
> has a soft focus option, and I am also looking at the 135 f2.8
> soft-focus lens. Anybody have any direct comparison experience between
> to the two and prefer one over the other?
>
> I'll probably upgrade bodies within the next 3 months or so (the dot com
> I work for is still alive so I figure I better buy when I still have a
> salary), so the lens might be a better option, but I'm open to getting
> another body to use for portraits if the II(?) is worth it.
>
> Thanks for your input,
> Jeff
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
