On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:15:52 +0800, you wrote:
>or the 28-105! Argh! Help! Somebody please pull me up! Or drop me a
>$600 cheque please! ;-)
>(should be enough for a Tokina 28-80 f/2.8 or used 28-70L)
>
>IMHO, this warning message should be printed on a yellow label and stuck on
>every prosumer zoom lens...but of course, Canon won't want that, would they?
>;-)
>
>LOL,
>BlueSky
>
>> From: "Julian Loke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> Another friendly warning: Never, NEVER put your photos from
>> the 50/1.8 next to photos from the 28-135 or the 28-90. That
>> action can lead to a slide down a long and slippery slope :-)
>>
Now, now don't panic. I think Julian's being a wee bit extreme! On
an initial machine print glance, thne 50/1.8 is sharp and nice, yes,
but the 28-135 is no slouch. And choosing your f-stop carefully, it's
wonderful. Now blowing things up to exhibit size I'm sure is a
different story, but I do little of that, unless projecting slides
large on a screen counts.
Anyone who hasn't done so should have a look at Dave Herzstein's
fascinating zoom comparison on his site, including overlapping shots
from the 28-105, 28-135, 28-70L and the 70-200L. Be interesting if
we could persuade him to compare some primes and zooms!
Go here:
http://mate.kjsl.com/~dave/lenstest/lenstest.html
Ken Durling
Website http://home.earthlink.net/~kdurling/
Alternate e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
