Erwin,
Wow! These are very nice pictures.
All taken with the 20/2.8?
I've made informal tests (8x12s) with both the 20/2.8 and the 20-35/3.5-4.5
and these have shown the 20/2.8 to be sharper.
Sharpness is VERY important for me, so I guess I will be happier with the
20/2.8 lens.
Pierre
At 09:35 3/6/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>Seems like more people have/had to make this difficult decision. I see
>you own a 28-135. I own a 28-105, and was also thinking: "I already have
>the 28-35 part of the zoom".
>Although a zoom is more versatile I really like (or even love) my fixed
>20mm. It's solid, sharp and has much less distortion at 20mm for what I
>observed while using the 20-35 USM from a friend. Believe me on the
>Eifel tower you can make a step forward/backward for a better
>composition. Never been to NY, but I guess you can do this also on the
>WTC :)
>
>See some travel pictures taken with my EF20mm here:
>http://home.wanadoo.nl/erwin.harkink/Photo/Paris.html
>
>A nice close focus picture here:
>http://home.wanadoo.nl/erwin.harkink/Photo/Scandinavia.html
>
>And maybe you decide to make some landscape pictures also:
>http://home.wanadoo.nl/erwin.harkink/Photo/Tenerife.html
>
>Let us know what you bought!
>
>Bye,
>Erwin
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
