Jack Casner wrote (edited): > Two weeks ago I found a "bargain" on the 28-70mm L > and tried it on my camera. Maybe I didn't spend enough > time examining the lens but it seemed no more robust > looking than my 28-135. > > As I say, this may be faulty observation on my part - I was > in a hurry - but I wasn't very impressed.
------------------------------------------------------- Jack, Well said. Although I think you will need to get your teflon coated flame retardant suit ready as this is the holy grail of lenses for the advanced amateur. If you actually check out the resolution specs you will also find the 28-135mm quite comparable to the 28-135 IS optically in the mid apertures. If one needs F2.8 then there is little choice, but if one doesn't shoot wide open then the 28-135IS IMO is the best bet (except for Chip who prefers his 28-105mm. See Chip, saved you the trouble of replying). Peter K * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
