"R.Sriram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote/replied to: >The lenses you have (28-90 and 75-300) are not exactly stellar performers. >In fact, they are considered bottom of the barrel performers. You will >get much better results with primes or even with decent zooms such as the >28-105/3.5-4.5 USM. I chose a 24/2.8, a 50/1.8 and a 100/2.8 macro USM.
That's debatable considering hand holding. Oh how people love to knock the 75-300. And then they go and hand hold L glass... And of course you can't zoom a prime :-) In the end it depends on what you NEED. I bought both the 50/1.4 and the 85/1.8 and really haven't used them much. I was thinking of selling and getting a 28-80L in fact. For some compelling reasons to get the 50/1.4 over the 1.8 look here: http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/ For some testing of cheap zooms go here: http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/28zooms/ -- Jim Davis Nature Photography http://jimdavis.oberro.com Replies in plain text only please! * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
