"Robins, Stuart R" wrote:
> Why is the 28-80 crappy? Is it because you looked at your slides (which
> were shot using a rock steady tripod and focused perfectly of course)
> through a Leica/Zeiss 8x loupe and exclaimed "My God! These slides are
> soft!" or was it like me, who read all the internet posts telling you how
> crappy the lens was so you decided to get a better one.
>
> Given how many shots im selling and how many photos im shooting, I probably
> would have saved alot of money by keeping the 'crappy' lens. I've since
> started shooting M & LF, trading in half my EOS gear in the process.
I am guessing that M, above, means Medium Format. If this is true you
might be somewhat familiar with the name Hasselblad. It is a MF camera
that is almost a standard that all other MF cameras are compared to.
Hasselblad has a web site, http://www.photodo.com. This site gives,
among other things, ratings of lenses. They say the 28-80 Mk IV is
crappy, they give it a 2.2 overall rating. The older Mk II is better at
3.1. The 28-105 got a 3.3 and the 28-135 IS got a 3.4. So I guess the
28-1x5 lenses are most likely better.
I lost
> a whole lot on the transaction (I bought all my EOS stuff new).
You didn't expect this? Did you figure you'd get more than 75% of
current new price for the used EOS stuff? That isn't the way it works.
I doubt any
> editor would have told me "That 28-80 that your using is crap, get a better
> lens!". In fact, most editors (and almost any person vieweing your photos,
> with the exception of another photographer) wont care what it was shot with.
> If you shoot through a glass coke bottle and get a sharp, well composed and
> interesting photo it wouldn't matter.
This is true, no argument on this statement.
> Also, if you have this problem now with the 28-80, whats to say that the
> 28-105, 28-135 (etc) will solve the quality issue? You will then want to
> 28-70/2.8L and wont be happy till you own one. You will probably ignore
> this advice (like I did) and get the new lens anyway, thinking it will
> improve your photos to the quality of an experienced pro. Unfortunately,
> mine didn't - I hope you have better success.
Read the photodo tests......
> All im saying is before you hand the money over for the 'better quality'
> lens, ask yourself why. I didn't, and I reget wasting the money I have
> (I've spend nearly AUD$40,000 in the last 12 months on photo gear).
>
> - Stuart.
Bob
--
//////
( 0 0 )
-73 de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Everybody has a photographic memory. Some just don't have any film.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
