Phil wrote:
> I can't complain about the quality of my one L lens, it's top
> quality and pin sharp, the 70/200 F4 IS but at £800
> it damn well should be, even with my compulsive buying disorder it
> was hard to spend that much.
PRECISELY! At that cost, it should also wash the dishes.
I don't quite understand the thinking of "throw money around" for the
sake of throwing money around. My ancient 100/2.8 and 200/4 lenses
are producing top-quality results with minimal inconvenience. As I
tend to plan my shots ahead (form follow function?), I rarely miss a
shot thanks to the lack of IS or AF or the wrong focal-length.
Not that I wouldn't mind being able to throw some money around, but
it's awefully difficult to justify some of these purchases to the
CDFO.
AG
____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|