I'm not surprised that "L" lenses are "the answer", but indeed can I be confident that this is the case? What are the factors: more careful light dispersion, better assembly, etc. that yield the better performance, or, in their absence, poorer performance? I chose the 28-200 as a starter lens to give me a single flexible bundle of glass to use while I learned what the 1Ds could do. Now that I'm past that stage I guess I'll start down the road to "L". Again, in your opinions, can I do so with confidence? Thanks.