>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 10:24:17 -0700
>From: Doug Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: EOS Amateur Lens Advice
>Now, obviously the IS lens is better, but also more expensive. I really
>don't have a problem spending the extra money to get the better lens, but my
>real concern is in filters. I would like to have a good selection of
>filters to play around with, but the 72mm filter size of the 28-135 means
>good filters are nearly twice as costly as the 58mm ones for the 28-105.
>Additionally, I'll probably be looking to buy a longer range lens in the
>future - most likely the 100-300 USM which also has a 58mm filter size. So,
>if I went with the 28-105, I could then have interchangeable filters whereas
>with the 28-135, I would need a whole new set.
Doug,
I have the 28-105 USM and 100-300 USM for my EOS300. FWIW I've never felt
'disappointed' with the combo; I'm very happy with the results it gives me.
I share filters between my two lenses; so far that's saved me about
$100AUD and growing each time I buy a new filter / close up adapter.
There's only been a few times I wished I had IS - the few times I haven't
had my tripod with me in low light conditions (I also have the 50/1.8 which
solves many problems). Most low-light problems where I don't have my
tripod with me, in my experience, can be solved with the faster lens or my
flash, which I carry everywhere anywhere.
---
Dion Mikkelsen
http://dionsplace.terrashare.com/
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
