From: Michael Quack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I bet that the Sigma 50 2,8 EX Macro is
> > better optically.
>
> Wouldn't bet a cent on that.
Too bad. I have won ! :)
Tests from Chasseur d'Images show that the Sigma is better at full aperture,
at f/16 for exemple.
> And with the various compatibility problems in
> firmware I'd be rather reluctant to buy Sigma.
Yes... Bad point for Sigma.
I understand, still if Sigma corecting the problem for free.
> Do you know that in some Sigma lenses a complete
> lens group is fixed with only adhesive tape?
Do you know that a lot of lenses are very good ones ?
EX - HSM ones to be precise.
A cheap lens stay a cheap lens, from all manufacturers.
Please do not generalize your opinion...
> The Canon needs the lifesize extender for that, right.
> On the other hand the extender is indeed a 1.4 extender,
> which results in far better working distance than with
With less optical performances.
Do you want to tell that the extender/lifesize extender have no effect on
the real aperture when it's placed on the lens ?!
<�+�> PhOTo <�+�> GrAPhiSMe <�+�>
Portail : http://perso.magic.fr/drocha
Groupe fran�ais Canon EOS :
http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/group/canoneos_fr
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
