A two part post, if you don't mind...
1. I've been contemplating getting this lens (the original, I mean) and a
2x extender for some time. I know the 100-400 L with a 2x extender loses
it's IS function on an A2(EOS 5). But is this because it's max. aperture
is only 5.6 or because the A2 is now considered an "older" EOS body?
Any guesses as to whether or not the IS feature on this new lens would
work on an A2 with a 2x? (I know I'll only have the center AF point) If
not, obviously the original is the way to go.
2. I've started saving already, because I don't really see too many other
options. (not because I HAVE to have an L lens) The 100-300 USM seems to
consistently get reviewed as junk at 300mm wide open - even by armatures
like me, the 100-300 L focuses too slow and has a rotating front, (I'll be
shooting sports and auto races) the 75-300 IS USM is a micro USM (which I
don't like) and the 100-400 L is a constant f/5.6 and HUGE. Right now the
only tele lens I have is an 80-200 4.5-5.6 (circa 1990, I believe) and
would desperately like to upgrade. I shoot sports, portraits, candids and
landscapes. I love the idea of 2.8 for low-light candids and background
blur. And I'm not big on flash photography - save for fill-in.
I know I could save some money and spring for a prime 200 2.8 and 2x, but
I like the versatility of the 70-200's range.
Any words of wisdom?
-Green
Heck, while I'm at it... I typically shoot 100 speed film, (color and b/w)
always print, and make about 4 or 5 enlargements a year for myself and
maybe that many for friends, etc... and my main lens now is the 28-105
USM.
.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
