> Moose wrote:
> At $400+, I'll pass. The Can*n EF 35/2, old design that it is, is a
> better lens and costs half as much. Close enough to "normal" fl on
> APS-C, too, 58mm eq.
Yeah, that's what I thought, but I've seen the 35/2 get the occasional
criticism too - maybe even seen same relative to the Sigma. I think
cheap-and-cheerful might win the race though. The C*non is also, I
believe, significantly smaller. Even better of a 300/350D, but I
like the "feel" of smaller and lighter on the 10D too - I feel less
like I'm front-weighted.
Ahh, a possible changing of mind again. It'd be fun if it wasn't so
time-consuming.
Cheers,
Marc
Sydney, Oz
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|