Pierre Bellavance wrote:
It's very hard to say by how much, and whether or not it's enough to forego
the flexibility of a zoom. What I know is that I like sharp photos with a
lot of details...
I've taken three different sets of pictures outside on a street, on a
tripod, with both lenses, wide open and at f/8, that were all enlarged to
8x12.
There were forms and there was text, such as addresses and restaurant menus
on the wall.
The forms (buildings, cars, etc) are similar looking with both lenses, but
the text is always easier to read when taken with the 20/2.8 at f/8. This
makes the pictures more interesting to look at because of the added
readability. You don't have to squint to read. The letters seem tighter and
seem to have more contrast, which makes them easier to read.
Wide open, strangely, the picture is muddier with the 20 than with the
20-35, but at the same time text is easier to read...!!! Try to explain
this...
Closed down to f/8, everything is easier to read with the 20mm lens. The
difference can be seen easily on an 8x12 without using a magnifier, even if
it's slight.
Pierre
____________________________________________________________________________
__
If you need a 20mm F2.8 lens, consider the Tamron 20-40mm F2.7-3.5.
Excellent optic.
As a matter of fact the Photodo ratings show it is sharper at 20mm than the
fixed
focal length EF20mm F.28 and slightly faster since it is F2.7. Not a bad
lens.
Have it, use it, would not part with it. Only downside its not USM AF
speed. But
since it is a WA I can live with that easily.
Peter K
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
