Tom Pfeiffer wrote:
Read all this today, and some is really cool. I wonder why someone
would want to buy a 70-200 f/4 if they can buy it faster at f/2.8...
one of the joys of owning that lens (IS version) is its
speed in the field. I hand-hold it all the time and it never
ceases to impress me.
Well, money comes to mind followed closely by size and weight......
Bob
I think the point of the thread was that the new f/4 IS costs more than the
f/2.8 non IS.
tomp
Tom,
That's not the way I read it when I saw (IS version) in Jane's
post.........
Eveything has a high cost when new...... When I bought my 70-200 f/2.8
the IS version just came out. Seems like there was a $700
difference....... Maybe the difference was less but the non IS was, to
me, significantly less than the new IS.......
Bob
--
/////
( O O )
--------------------oOOO-----O----OOOo-----73 de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Curiosity killed the cat although I was a suspect for a while........
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
