--- Tom Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Those decisions aside, has anyone used both of these > and could perhaps > comment on the image quality similarity/differences? > I understand the value > of IS, I'm more interested in the "other" things, > like handling, sharpness, > focusing speed, etc.
Handling, focus speed, etc. should be very comparable. I haven't used a 35-350 in a very long time (and only used it briefly, then) but my recollection is that it was not as sharp as I would have liked. 10X is a very difficult range to render sharply throughout. If my memory is accurate, I think the 100-400 is significantly better optically. You won't be using the out reaches of the 35-350's image circle, which should help some, but I still think the 100-400 is better. It would be a real nice range on the 10D though, wouldn't it. ===== Bob Meyer I wish I knew what I know now, when I was younger... http://www.meyerweb.net/epson __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
