70-210/3.5-4.5 USM

I bought this lens for pretty cheap off of Ebay; it was the first in a long string of successful (and expensive) photo purchases from the auction site that everyone loves to hate. It was my first lens with the "real" Ultrasonic motor (instead of the ghetto-type Micro USM found in the 28-80), and I couldn't believe how quiet and fast the focusing was.

There's not a lot to say about this lens; it was cheap, it gets the job done, and it's my only long(ish) telephoto. It's not super-sharp at 210mm, but I'm not a sharpness freak anyway. It's not super long, but it was long enough to get pretty tight shots of the Blue Angels in flight at the 2001 Duluth Air & Aviation Expo [link] (it helped that I was in the front row of spectators at the show). I don't use the lens very often, since it's not long enough for anything crazy like birds or distant airplanes, and it's too long for general-purpose shooting.

I've thought about replacing it, but anything else would either be a) too expensive for the amount of use I'd get out of it or b) not enough of a change to warrant the hassle of switching lenses. I briefly fantasized about a 70-200/4L, but then I thought, what the hell do I need that kind of lens for? It's 600 bucks and I'd use it for maybe 5% of my shooting. Portaiture maybe? Screw that, I said, and bought the 100/2 USM for that purpose. I also thought about the 100-300/3.5-4.5 USM, or the 75-300 and its IS equivalent, but they're all too similar in focal lengths and I wouldn't gain anything in image quality. IS might be nice, but again, who cares? "5%, Alex," I kept saying, reminding myself that buying a new lens would just mean that I'd have a more expensive thing to leave at home when I went shooting and wanted to lighten my bag. So the 70-210 stays.