--- Paulo Abrantes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> And is IS really that good? I've read it can improve
> up to 2 stops. I never
> tried it but I'm not very convinced of it.\
Yes, IS is *really* that good. Maybe better. But be
aware that it's not really the same as a 2 stop faster
lens. It lets you shoot at slower shutter speeds
handheld, but can't give you the shallower depth of
field that a 2 stop faster lens would. OTOH, it's a
lot cheaper than a 2 stop faster lens.
>
> About the Canon's 28-135 I was getting convinced
> with what Bob has told me (and you
> also agree) and with the reviews I was reading about
> that lens. Although someone on
> a review came up with something I hadn't thought of
> since this one is a "regular" lens
> and not a DC one (when I say regular I mean it can
> be mounted on a film camera also)
> I'll have the 1.6x factor on my eos 300D making the
> lens a 44-216...
> Maybe that's not wide enough, I use my 18-55mm a
> lot. I'm getting 2nd thoughs now,
> it's still better than my 55-200mm, but what I
> really wanted was a lens that wouldn't
> make me to change lens all the time.
I'm not sure how it fits your budget, but take a
serious look at the Canon 17-85. On your 300D, it give
the same field of view as a 28-135 on a full frame
camera. And includes IS. A very nice lens, but maybe a
bit pricey. I wouldn't worry about the fact that it
won't work on a full frame camera unless you also have
a film EOS. Canon has committed to continuing the 1.6x
sensor cameras, and FF DSLRs are going to be a LOT
more expensive than 1.6x DSLRs for a long time.
Bob Meyer
I don't suffer from insanity... I enjoy every minute of it.
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
