I've heard that the earlier 28-80 lenses were better, and Photodo seems to bear this out, ranking them at 3.2 versus 2.2 for the newer offerings. But the 50 1.8 is rated at 4.2, way ahead of either. In fact, no Canon AF zoom that has been rated by them scored higher, including the 70-200 2.8L (non-IS) at 4.1, the cult favorite 28-105 (3.3) or the "incredible" 28-70 2.8L (3.9). It was tied by the 80-200 2.8L, though.
Tom P. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Drikus van der Veen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:01 AM Subject: Re: EOS 50mm 1.8 questions..... > > > I agree with your email but not this poiunt. The 50mm is a very sharp lens > > and nice contrast. THe 28-80 is a not a good lens, very soft. THere is a > lot > > of difference between these two lenses. > > > It totaly depends on wich version of the 28-80 you compare it to. The first > 28-80 is quit good, so the difference is not so big in that case. > > Drikus * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
