> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Thomas Bantel
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 6:35 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: EOS Lens Comparisons
>
> To a certain degree, yes. OTOH, fast lenses are also more prone to flare
> than slower lenses, which reduces the contrast. And the 50 f/1.8 is still
> a quite fast lens. So I'd expect the 50mm f/2.5 macro to be a
> little better
> still at its best f/stop. But all these minute differences, if they are
> really there, are taking place on a very high level of performance. They
> might make not much of a visible difference in real world shooting. And
> while the "more elements means lower contrast" statement has still some
> validity, modern lens coatings have greatly reduced the problem. Therefor,
> a lens with more elements but better correction of the lens aberrations
> can actually have better contrast than a more simple design with less
> elements.
>
> Thomas Bantel
Thanks for the clear explanation.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
