Jane,

Your argument recieves even more weight now:

Just got email from EOS Magazine correcting the price
of the F4 IS from 650 Sterling to 990 Sterling. Puts
this one out waaaaaayy out of reach for many IMO ...

- Harman

--- Jane Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> apologies not needed. I was indeed talking the f/4
> IS, but in either case, despite the weight I
> still think the f/2.8 is the better choice. Ok,



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to