> I was looking at the chart for the 400 DO IS. Doesn't look very good or > am I missing something? Is this the compromise one has to take for a > shorter and lighter lens? Does anybody made any real world comparison > between the 400/2.8IS and the 400/4DOIS?
Robert, "Doesn't look very good"? The 400 4.0DO has slightly higher MTF curves (is sharper) than the 400 5.6L I own - especially in the 30 lines/mm curves. The 400 4.0DO is not quite as good as the 400 2.8IS (which is just the sharpest 400/2.8 ever made I dare say). As for MTF charts in general, anything above 0.6 should give decent quality, and above 0.8 should be an excellent performer (e.g. L glass). Lars -- Lars Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] 87GT http://www.larsmichael.com/ * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
