not a clue. Yet... I've got a call into someone who might be able to answer it. First I've seen of it.
Back to the conversation of 4 vs. 2.8. My real plus for the 2.8 is that it carries the same front end size as the 24-70, 16-35 (77mm). The f/4 is 67mm, meaning yet another set of filters... eek! (more weight in that pesky backpack...) Closest focal distance is only a difference of about 6 inches, so despite the added weight I still think the 2.8 has more bang for the buck. but then, what do I know? I am only one voice among many... jane --- Harman Bajwa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Canon site depicts the new lens with something > called "DW-R". Any idea what that means ? > > - Harman > __________________________________________________ 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 ***********************************************************
