The weight was never a problem. Extended range and IS would sell me. I switched to a 28-135 mostly for the added range that is so useful during candid portrait situations with the IS as a nice bonus. Bye bye 28-70. I haven't missed it at all. I sure would trade up to that rumoured 24-105/2.8 IS, or possibly even a 28-105/2.8 IS, though I would miss the extra range on the long end.
Mike Bob Sull wrote: > > Derek Seaman wrote: > > > > Canon has released new versions of the 17-35/2.8L and 70-200/2.8L. Does > > anyone know if they are working on a new 28-70/2.8L? The 28-70 is the > > workhorse of my collection, and would love an improved version. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > Derek > > Other than the weight, what improvements would you want? > > Bob -- Michael Shupe M.J.Shupe Photography Michigan Tech University www.northernlightsgallery.com * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
