Al Ruscelli wrote: > > I just bought an EOS 10D with a 16-35/f2.8L (which is a lot of fun), > and I > > am considering my next lens. Having seen all the writing about the > triplet > > "L"s, I am considering the 70-200/f2.8L IS and either the > 1.4x or 2.0x > > converter. Another option would be the 100-400L IS. What > would be the > next > > best choice for portraits and wildlife? > > I don't yet own the IS version of the 70-200 f2.8L, but the previous > version that I have is one of my finest and most favored > lenses. Great > for both portraits AND wildlife. If you're going to > eventually get the > 24-70, go for the 70-200 now. You'll be very happy. > ------------------------------------------------------------ I agree with Al, F2.8 is a necessary aperture for isolating your subjects. The new 70-200mm F2.8 IS is said to be sharper than the older one and should be a killer lens for both wildlife and portraits. One consideration is portraits of women should be a softening filter. I own the 135mm F2L and when I used it for a picture of my wife she made me get rid of the image almost immediately. Sometimes lenses can be tooooo sharp.
Peter K * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
