Chris Eastwood wrote: > > Is it just me, or are we all accepting less some how? > > Chris Eastwood
Chris, when I used the term "robust" in my comments on the 28-135, I wasn't really talking about the construction. It seems plenty solid to me, though certainly not as solid as my old pentax gear or the old Canon gear (MF stuff). I was commenting on the electrical stuff inside, the AF and IS systems. Actually we are expecting **more** like IS and AF and then complaining when these newly complicated systems fail us. If you want truly robust gear that you never have to worry about a lens "failing to operate", then you need to go with mechanical cameras(which do sometimes fail to operate) and their incredibly robust lenses. However, I need the systems that introduce complexity and fragility, so I guess I will trade robustness for them. Mike -- 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 ***********************************************************
