> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neukranz, > Bill > Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 1:06 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: EOS Another Lens Debate: 300 f/2.8 vs 100-400 IS > > > There's an analysis on the Luminous Landscape web site that concludes > there's little photographic quality improvement between the older 2.0X and > the newer 2.0X II extenders. > > Regards, Bill
Hi Bill, I saw that test. I think with the EOS 1D using only the center 2/3 of the frame the difference might work well enough for me when compared to an original EF 2X with a full frame film image. I don't really NEED to get to 520mm very often but sometimes wish I could get closer to the 600mm I used to have with the EF 300 2.8L and EF 2X. This is why I'm considering the EF 2X. Of course a good, used EF 2X II is close to 1/4 the price of a nice used EF 300 4L IS lens and a lot smaller and lighter to have in the bag. Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
