Well, it's only a half stop slower than the Sigma 28-104 f/2.8-4.0 at any given length. Or are you speaking of the 82-80 2.8 Sigma?
Tom P. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 9:47 AM Subject: EOS Which lens > > > Tom Pfeiffer wrote: > > Well, there is the Canon 24-85mm. I've owned at least three of them, > they > are very nice lenses. USM, full time manual focus, distance scale, > non-rotating front element, in other words all those things your > friend's > 28-80 doesn't have, plus the 4mm on the wide end and 5mm on the long > end. > And it's at least a full stop faster at every focal length. The only > downside is the 67mm filter size. So next time he asks, you'll be able > to > tell him the truth? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------ > > The 24-85mm is too slow if you want to really blow out the background. > Hence, a Sigma may be better for some purposes. > > Peter K > * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
