mario_giberti

Maybe more of a comment then a question, but in autobracketing on my Elan IIE in shooting Velvia, I was AMAZED at how well the meter on this camera worked. On 95% of the shots out in Bryce, Zion, Grand Canyon, and Monument Valley, I am throwing away an over exposed and an under exposed slide(the 2nd and 3rd shot in the three shot autobracketing), and keeping the slide the camera correctly metered for. I autobracketed for one stop over and under. Maybe 1/2 stop autobracketing would have given me finer choices in correct exposure, but I am happy with the results.. Any thoughts?

Oh, to add to this, I do note that the 100 2.8 macro can't be used with the 1.4 unless an extension tude is used.

I am considering selling my 100-300 4.5 (too slow) and getting either a 135lL f2, or a 100 f2 and a 1.4 x converter. (or the 100 macro and 1.4x converter).

The positives I see in regards to the 100 f2 (or 100 macro) and 1.4 is that I can use the 1.4 with a variety of lenses, and future telephoto lenses. The 140, 2.8 combination when using the 1.4 is fairly fast. The macro would be slower, but have the obvious macro capabilities

The cost of the 135L f2 vs teleconverter 1.4 and 100 f2 are about equal.

Posts and articles indicate that these are all good lenses. Any thoughts?

Should I buy the EW75 from old stock for $30, or the EW75II for $45?

I have not seen either, and am trying to save a drive all around town.

Does anyone know the difference between these two lens shades?

Thanks,

MJ