PB> I've made (unconclusive) tests with both lenses; I'm now waiting for 8x12
PB> prints made wide open and at f/8 with both of them.
PB> Some tests found on the web (photodo, photozone, etc) show one as superior,
PB> and other tests show the other one as superior... contrast and sharpness
PB> wise. Chasseur d'Images says the 20/2.8 is the better one, which is only
PB> logical, I guess. It's rated as Excellent while the 20-35 is rated as Very
PB> Good.
Hello Pierre,
If the tests have no clear winner then no one is superior by far and
your personal use should dictate the investment. If distortion is the
most important issue to you go for the one with less distortion, if
close focussing distance is important choose the prime. If versatility
is your goal choose the zoom.
I own a Tamron 20-40 and love it's versatility, especially when
travelling but I'm currently looking out for a second-hand prime (20mm
or 24mm) with closer focussing distance and less distortion.
--
Best regards,
Dieter mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
