canon 300D, same as DS6041 model?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: John McWilliams on 25 Aug 2005 18:37 Dave R knows who wrote: > "Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball(a)REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message > news:nRkPe.80$hW.37(a)tor-nn1... > >>"Skip M" wrote>> >> >>>The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a >>>replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens. >>> >> >>The NEW 70-300 (one of the NEW 2 lenses just announced by Canon that the >>poster was referring to) IS a PROFESSIONAL lense made with the >>PROFESSIONAL LEVEL bodies in mind, so OF COURSE it is not EF-S. >> > Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality. > > Be careful, Dave; Linda, based on her appearance here a month ago or so, is never wrong. Never. And she bites like a little Trapper. -- John McWilliams
From: Linda Nieuwenstein on 25 Aug 2005 19:06 "Dave R knows who" wrote... > > > Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality. Perhaps you should read more before continuing to spout foolishness... Phil knows what you don't: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.asp Take care, Linda
From: Linda Nieuwenstein on 25 Aug 2005 19:07 "John McWilliams" wrote> Be careful, Dave; Linda, based on her appearance here a month ago or so, > is never wrong. Never. > > And she bites like a little Trapper. > > -- > John McWilliams > Oh look my stalker John Williams crawled out of the hole to make an appearance. What fun. Take care, Linda
From: Linda Nieuwenstein on 25 Aug 2005 19:10 "Dave R knows who" wrote > > I'm getting emotional because you are dead wrong, IMO. > Your unproven opinion means ziltch to me when it so greatly conflicts with the overwhelmingly proven, and definitive opinion of Phil's: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.asp Take care, Linda
From: Bruce Graham on 25 Aug 2005 21:44
In article <E9sPe.86$hW.6(a)tor-nn1>, buzzball(a)REMOVETHIS-allstream.net says... > > "Dave R knows who" wrote... > > > > > > Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality. > Perhaps you should read more before continuing to spout foolishness... > > Phil knows what you don't: > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.asp > > Take care, > Linda > > Phil does not say the new 70-300 is an L lens. (the 70-300 announcement is just on the same page as the 24-105L announcement). It may be better than the old 75-300 (which is *certainly* not up to L standards) as the press release infers that it has some UD glass and I don't believe the old one does. I have the old 100-300 which is similar optically - mine is not great - has quite low contrast and definition at the 300mm end. Most owners report the same. Bruce G |