> Gary A. Thurlow wrote > > > One more thing - how on earth do some of you guys afford to buy a D-30 and > a pack of "L" lenses? I can't even afford ONE "L" lens, let alone a whole > outfit! The only rule I have regarding lenses is that it must be Canon and > it must be USM. I would love to own some "pro" glass, but sticking it on > my EOS-RT seems like so much overkill.
Almost any of the short primes are in the same quality category as L glass. The 50/1.4, 35/2, and 85/1.8 don't need to apologize for anything, and you can spend even more money on those focal lengths, if you want to. One L lens to keep your eyes open for on the used market, is the 200/2.8L (either version). It's not cheap, but it isn't unreasonable either, and is an excellent performer. I too, am tempted by digital. But I've decided I can afford to wait (or maybe I can't afford not to wait) for a body that will give adequate quality for the same price as a decent film body. Unless you're shooting for a newspaper, or something else that needs short turnaround, or your film costs are very significant, it's hard to justify digital right now. Of course, once I go the digital route, I'll hang onto at least one of the film bodies I have now. They may not be worth anything in trade by then anyway. :-) Geoff Doane * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
