> << Ya, well my 20-35 non L does have USM, and frankly I love it. It's USM
from
> now on for me on every lens I buy. I love the way people without USM say
> they don't miss it. Of course you don't, you don't have it. I have it,
and I
> would miss it...
> >>
> HI,
> Well, I think that everyone prefers USM, but when it comes to having to
chose
> better optics vs USM, especially on a wide angle lens, USM is not a first
> choice. I have lenses - with and without USM. And while I find USM to be
> great - I find it much more useful on a long lens - like my 100-400L vs
> 20-35L. Would I like to have it on my 20-35L - yes! But the fact that it's
> not there doesn't make me want to sell it to get either 20-35USM non L nor
> more expensive 17-35L USM.
> George
I don't know about better optics, but if you already have the L 20-35
lens, it's certainly not a point for trading it in.
Maybe it's the red ring on the barrel then that people really like about
this very expensive lens. Cause the non L 20-35 tests sharper than the L,
and it has USM. Or maybe people like heavier lenses and the fractional
f-stop gain. Personally, I think the non L is very well built. Plus, it's
light, and compact. It's good enough for many PROs I might add, and it's
good enough for me. I kind of like the gold ring on it :-)
Jim
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
