Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>I'm sorely tempted. The justification for the owner of this camera came
>when he realized that he was contemplating the purchase of a 16-35 L
>lens to get a good performing wide angle zoom for his 20D. But he
>already had a 28-70 L lens which gives approximately the same angle of
>coverage on a full frame body. He "avoided" spending $1400 which he
>applied to the 5D instead.
>
>
Yes, it's quite tempting. I did the same thing as your friend, but on a
lower scale. I chose to buy a cheap 19-35/3.5-4.5 instead of one of the
$5-600 APS only zooms. Just haven't bought the 5D to go with it yet...
:-) I got my money's worth out of the 19-35 already though on the 300D.
If that client check for almost $20k would just show up, there is just
about enough of that money not already spent to pay for a 5D. Of course,
I may change my mind by then. Or continue waiting for the price to slide
down a bit further. Still hoping for $2,500.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|