> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 09:54:52 +0100
> From: Thomas Bantel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: FD vs EOS
> > Sadly enough: No. I have never seen anything as sharp as my
> > old FDn 3.5/135 mm telephoto in EF, and the EF 2.5/50 mm compact
> > macro offers handling advantages, but the FDn 3.5/50 mm macro
> > was the better lens both for mechanical and optical reasons.
>
> That's an interesting statement. That old FDn 3.5/135 must be
> a mighty impressive lens if it is better than the EF 2/135L. Was it
> really *that* good? Some magazines said it was the "best lens tested
> ever" at the time they tested it. Then again, magazines tend to hype
> new products. Just wondering...
The FDn 3.5/135 mm performance isn't so surprising at all.
It is perfectly symmetric in design, not very fast allowing
for better correction, it is built equivalent to focal length
preventing the need for retro- or telephoto designs.
It would have been a shame if there was any design flaw
in something as simple.
--
Michael Quack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.photoquack.de
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
