P�l Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In a message dated 1/9/2003 9:00:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> >> > An FA 400 2.8 for 35mm. >> >> I'd go with that -- something good for wild life photography that would not also >break the bank. > >A 400/2.8 that would not break the bank? Never heard about such a lens.
Well, for certain values of "bank" I suppose. It'd certainly break *my* bank, but I know people who spent more on their stereo speakers than my car cost new! -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
