On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:58:04PM -0500, Singh, Sarbjit (S.) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I am a proud owner of an EOS 20D and use it for portraits, kids sports > and a few landscapes. I'm assuming that's what you're going to be shooting in the future as well (not planning to get seriously into birds, for example). > I need your expertise to help resolve which lens out of > EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM OR > EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM > will make more sense for me You don't tell which lenses you already have, but if such a choice makes sense at all, I'd choose the 70-200 without hesitation. > I have heard a lot more about the 70-200mm than the 28-300mm - does the > 70-200 so much sharper resolution that it will beat 28-300 hands down ? Yes. What's more, and perhaps more important, the wide aperture makes it *much* better in low-light or fast action situations like sports, and it gives you better DoF control in portraits. Not that the 28-300 is really bad (it's certainly better than Tamron 28-300 and the like), but it's a big compromise, and I'd only consider it if you frequently find yourself in situations where you cannot change lenses (even then I'd consider carrying a second body instead). Even if you think 200mm is too short I'd suggest getting the 70-200 and adding 1.4x TC - it'd still be faster and and probably sharper than the 28-300. The only big downside in the 70-200/2.8 is that it may make all your other lenses feel so bad you'll end up replacing them all with L glass. :-) -- Tapani Tarvainen * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
