Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="r00ster" data-source="post: 576162" data-attributes="member: 42611">Don;&nbsp;: Copy that, sensei.When I bought the 55-200, I weighed its purported functionality against the 70-300 and decided I didn't really need the extra mm's based on 2 things: ... price difference of course, and pics already taken with the 105 macro blew up wonderfully, making the extra lens magnification superfluous for my custom of usage. The extra 100mms the 70-300 sported would force a decision to always pack a tripod or just leave both at home. If I had it to do over again I would have gone for an f/2.8 FFL prime lens with approx 2.5-3X magnification... assuming for the moment such a lens is available. Meanwhile, I'm learning to get the most out of the 105mm micro macro... still have lots to learn.À bientôt,rodp.s. Post # 15. My pics get an &quot;Invalid Attachment&quot; notification! 1000 pxls length/width with 72 dpi</blockquote>

[QUOTE="r00ster, post: 576162, member: 42611"] Don; : Copy that, sensei. When I bought the 55-200, I weighed its purported functionality against the 70-300 and decided I didn't really need the extra mm's based on 2 things: ... price difference of course, and pics already taken with the 105 macro blew up wonderfully, making the extra lens magnification superfluous for my custom of usage. The extra 100mms the 70-300 sported would force a decision to always pack a tripod or just leave both at home. If I had it to do over again I would have gone for an f/2.8 FFL prime lens with approx 2.5-3X magnification... assuming for the moment such a lens is available. Meanwhile, I'm learning to get the most out of the 105mm micro macro... still have lots to learn. [COLOR=#242729][FONT=Arial]À bientôt, [/FONT][/COLOR]rod p.s. Post # 15. My pics get an "Invalid Attachment" notification! 1000 pxls length/width with 72 dpi [/QUOTE]

Verification