Ok I know I'm no lens expert but, how the heck does a small aperture range make a "better" lens? I mean let just point out the bad points here. the smaller aperture means you need either longer exposures, or much faster film. Also, every teacher I have ever asked about this has said that the smaller the aperture is the lower the image quality. Now I can see how that could just be a preference thing but, you can't change the physics of having a small aperture and needing more light or faster film. Also a lens with such a small range of apertures offer VERY little in the way of creative abilities. (Blurring backgrounds and such) At 07:00 PM 8/6/2002 +0000, you wrote: > Charles wrote --- > > > I found a Canon EF 80-200mm f4.5-5.6 ULTRASONIC lens in great >shape > (near mint) in a used camera store and Iīīm tempeted to buy >it but I > couldnīt find any info about itīs quality around the web .. > > It's quality is commensurate with its price. Bottom-end consumer >grade lens. Stay at f/11-16 for maximum quality. > --- Luis Brian Blankenship B & N Graphics http://www.bngraphics.com
