--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > "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.
Hm, are we looking at the same charts? The charts on Canon's webpage show better curves for the 400/5.6L then the 400/4DOIS. > 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). Hm, 'not quite as good'? Again the charts I am looking at show a huge difference between the 400/2.8LIS and the 400/4DOIS both wide open and closed down. > 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). Correct. It's just that from a $6000 lens (price of cameraworld for the 400/4DOIS) I would expect considerable better results. Even more so as it is not much less expensive then the 400/2.8ISL which gives you 2.8 vs 4. I wonder how many 400/4DOIS Canon will sell...? Well, I guess all that is the reason why Canon does not give it the L designation in its name!! So DO != L which was a question on this list quite a long time ago. Robert __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
