Vesa Perala schrieb:
>
> >direct comparison, f/2.8 vs f/3.5 is "a little" unfair. It's a 2/3 stop
> >difference.
>
> I believe in Canon-terminology 3.5 is half a stop slower than 2.8.
> Just like 4 - 4.5 - 5.6.
>
> If it really matters.
>
May be, but I'm not sure about that. I suspect it's the other way round.
Canon chose to use 3.5 and 4.5 as "half stops" on bodies which can
display half stops only because they have a bunch of lenses which have
these as fastest aperture. If these lenses were really just a half stop
slower than 2.8 or 4, I can't see a reason why they shouldn't have marked
them with the correct aperture and also should have used those same values
in their cameras.
Thomas Bantel
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
