> I think I meant zooms, I should have been more explicit. Why not have a
> 28-80 2.8 which is not maybe as sturdy or "contrasty"? Just a thought.
Mayby because the difference in price between an 2.8-professional and an
2.8-amateur would be to low? Or mayby because the second-hand value of an
2.8 professional would become much lower? Or mayby because the lens-line-up
would become to crowded and confusing?
Persionaly I like my 28-80 3.5-5.6 USM I, wich has the same optical quality
as an 28-105, is sturdy and contrasty, for only about $ 250. Only not 2.8
:-( Still I'm thinking of buying an 28-80 2.8-4.0 L that is being offered
for $540. How much improvement will I get? Is it worth it? I don't know yet.
Drikus
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
