<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Why does everyone use the 24-105 vs. the 16-35 on C100s and 300s? in Professional Video</title>
    <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Professional-Video/Why-does-everyone-use-the-24-105-vs-the-16-35-on-C100s-and-300s/m-p/192244#M113</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have not heard of anything.&amp;nbsp; I would chalk up your observation as curious coincidence.&amp;nbsp; It's what they just happened to prefer.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2016 12:52:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Waddizzle</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-11-18T12:52:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Why does everyone use the 24-105 vs. the 16-35 on C100s and 300s?</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Professional-Video/Why-does-everyone-use-the-24-105-vs-the-16-35-on-C100s-and-300s/m-p/192229#M112</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I'm getting ready to buy a C100 but everyone I've seen out and about with a C100 or C300 is using the 24-105 lens. &amp;nbsp;24mm seems awfully narrow to me; wouldn't 16-35 be a better choice as the default lens for the kind of intimate shooting that the C100 is designed for? Or is there a conflict between the C100s and the&amp;nbsp;various Canon 16-35s?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2016 00:08:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Professional-Video/Why-does-everyone-use-the-24-105-vs-the-16-35-on-C100s-and-300s/m-p/192229#M112</guid>
      <dc:creator>jimmy1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-18T00:08:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Why does everyone use the 24-105 vs. the 16-35 on C100s and 300s?</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Professional-Video/Why-does-everyone-use-the-24-105-vs-the-16-35-on-C100s-and-300s/m-p/192244#M113</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have not heard of anything.&amp;nbsp; I would chalk up your observation as curious coincidence.&amp;nbsp; It's what they just happened to prefer.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2016 12:52:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Professional-Video/Why-does-everyone-use-the-24-105-vs-the-16-35-on-C100s-and-300s/m-p/192244#M113</guid>
      <dc:creator>Waddizzle</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-18T12:52:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Why does everyone use the 24-105 vs. the 16-35 on C100s and 300s?</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Professional-Video/Why-does-everyone-use-the-24-105-vs-the-16-35-on-C100s-and-300s/m-p/192355#M114</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I guess they wan't "normal" to telephoto, rather than wide to normal.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:56:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Professional-Video/Why-does-everyone-use-the-24-105-vs-the-16-35-on-C100s-and-300s/m-p/192355#M114</guid>
      <dc:creator>kvbarkley</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-19T18:56:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

