On 10 Mar 2007 at 15:41, Bill Gillooly wrote:
>
> I'd find it very hard to believe that Canon would bring out a EF 200mm
> f/2.8 L IS when the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS exists.
Well, both ordinary/old 200/2.8 and 80-200/2.8 have existed together
at one point in time, and there even was a mark-2 200/2.8 (only
different hood (separate instead of build-in/sliding)).
So that is not an argument....;))
> I'll be the first
> to agree that the prime lens will be a little sharper, but the market
> for that lens would have to be very, very small.
Given the difference in size/weight, that market might be larger than
you think.
My favorite minimum/lightweight package would be a 20mm and a 200mm.
Note that I can still not put any of these 200mm zooms upright in a
LowePro PhotoTrekker, something I *can* do with the 200/2.8.
(hence my request that *if* the lens becomes larger/longer with IS,
it should get DO as well, to shorten it back to the old size....;))
(better of course would be a 200/1.8 DO-IS with the same length and
weight as the old 200/2.8....;))
(I would *make* room for that in a PhotoTrekker, no matter how much
effort that would take....:))))
> Now, why they ever stopped producing the EF 200mm f/1.8 L is a mystery
> to me. An IS version would be awesome, not that I'd ever be able to
> cost-justify one. I'm not sure if it needs, or I'd want the DO
> treatment, though.
It was also said to be one of the sharpest in the range too, which
makes it even stranger.
(and a new design too, unlike the 300/2.8, which was copied from the
FD-era)
> Can anyone explain why Canon stopped producing the EF 50mm f/1.0 L?
> The
> new f/1.2 just isn't a replacement and used versions of the f/1.0
> sell
> for more than $5,000. I'd think Canon might have just upped the price
> and kept building a few.
Perhaps it wasn't compatible with the digi-sensor geometry any
more....
Or, reading all the focus issues: that would be even more visible
with such a low DOF.
And of course, your above argument of a very small market....;))
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
