>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/24/04 10:14PM >>> "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... I agree. I chose the 75-300 IS over the 70-200/4 L because I realized that I would be hand holding the lens most of the time. Also, the 75-300 isn't that bad at the short end. N.B. The information contained in this electronic message and any attached documents is privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this electronic message or any attached documents is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
