Hi Ken:
Ver I is USM as well and the optics is as sharp as the new one. The only
difference is its smaller than desired built-in shade (similar to the 300
f4L) compared to the non-built-in one for II. I have MKI and am quite happy
with it.
Regards,
Gary
----- Original Message -----
> Any opinions on the earler version of the 200mm f/2.8? I know a
> couple of folks here rave about the current one, but how is the Mk.I?
> I assume it's not USM, but otherwise?
>
>
> Ken Durling
>
>
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
