> Al Ruscelli wrote: > > >Yeah, that's the lens I'd want, unless they could go EF 24-105 2.8L. I > >all too often lament the short reach of the 28-70, although I love the > >lens otherwise. Probably my most often used lens. > > I find 70mm much too short also. I tend to shoot at around 28, 50 > and 100 when using my 28-105. > > I wonder if a 28-105 2.8-4 L lens would be well received. Perhaps > not - an aperture of f/4 wouldn't be so great for portrait uses. > > - Neil K.
Hi Neil, Why bother? Unless it was f/2.8 all the way I wouldn't buy one, I already have all three "L" zooms and some fast primes (EF 50 1.4USM, EF 85 1.8USM and EF 135 2L), to cover the portrait ranges. If I could buy an EF 28-105 2.8L that was as sharp as the EF 28-70 2.8L I'd buy it in a second and sell off my portrait primes. Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
