On 27 Feb 2004 at 0:39, Paul Moortgat wrote:
> Is a Canon 28-300 lens better than a 100-400 one? Anyone tested then
> both?
>
> Paul Moortgat
The 28-300 is a digi-crop-factor replacement (plus IS) for the 35-
350, which was fine for photo-journalists, but not for big blown up
slides.
100-400 is a higher grade lens....;))
I would suspect the new 70-300 to be closer in performance to the 100-
400....
(and in a way also a digi-crop replacement for it....;))
Wouldn't mind having a 24-200mm DO/IS either....;))
Willem (but first I want a 200/2.8 IS, or 200/2.0 DO/IS, darn!) Jan
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
