On 18/8/06, Marc Lawrence, discombobulated, unleashed:
[snipped] >Anyway, to actually get to a point, the 35/1.4L was positively >raved about at times (and I realise it's hard to not rave >about a lens you spend a lot of money on) as some folks' >favourite lens. I won't advocate you buying it, but I would >advocate researching it. It seemed very popular for those >in my shoes, looking for a "normal" length on a 1.6x digital >camera, but also those "full-framers" who like the wider >angle, and fast. > >So, I'm not really criticising any of the above - just suggesting >that from my longwinded search, I got the impression that the >35/1.4L might be one of those Canon favourites, that could be >worth your while googling for opinions and sample pictures. > >My 35/2 is unlikely to leave my camera much - it would be >my "One Lens" choice for a 1.6x sensor for the way it works with >my photographic mindset (I probably wouldn't shell out for the >1.4L, because I prefer something a bit more compact). > >Cheers, >(A different) Marc >Sydney, Oz G'day mate. Thanks for the thoughts. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________ * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
