n*********n 发帖数: 5605 | |
x*****g 发帖数: 3463 | |
d*****0 发帖数: 68029 | |
x****c 发帖数: 25662 | 4 I dont think there is any major difference.
【在 n*********n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 同上
|
n*********n 发帖数: 5605 | 5 How about the older C+ 17-85 IS USM ?
【在 x****c 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : I dont think there is any major difference.
|
t******e 发帖数: 1026 | 6
Forget it, unless you can get it under $250.
【在 n*********n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : How about the older C+ 17-85 IS USM ?
|
x****c 发帖数: 25662 | 7 17-85 is tragic for is MSRP. But if you can get one for 200~300, it can
replace 18-55IS
【在 n*********n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : How about the older C+ 17-85 IS USM ?
|
m****7 发帖数: 14685 | 8 不如的是铁丝情节吧
【在 x*****g 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 还是略有不如
|
g******z 发帖数: 5809 | 9 C+的贵,还有lens creep, 还不送遮光罩 |
i**e 发帖数: 6810 | 10 Not bad. IS is very effective. Not super sharp, though.
【在 n*********n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : How about the older C+ 17-85 IS USM ?
|