Chip Louie wrote (edited):
>. . . zillions of sports, fashion, advertising etc. images are
>sold and published that were shot wide open at f/2.8 and faster.
>Surely you didn't miss this thread.
I know there are many sports but not so sure on fashion and advertising.
Most studios that I am aware of use mid apertures for fashion but hey,
I do not know EVERYONE, like some claim they do. ;-)
> . . . AF speed and optical measurements aren't everything and I'm
>pretty sure that you would agree with this or you wouldn't be
>buying Sigma lenses.
Boy did you do a 180! Chip, It does not matter to me whether
the lens is a Tamron, Sigma, or Canon. "If I like a lens I buy it"
was a saying attributed to Alfred Eisenstadt, and he made some
great shots. Likewise with HC Bresson who now uses a Leica
Minilux instead of an M. Its the image that counts!
Yes, tests show the Sigma is a slightly lower perfomer but this
is for huge enlargements. I can tell you I did my own tests. Shot
a target with the Canon 70-200 and Sigma 70-200.
Then I projected them to 30x40. Guess what, up
close you could not see a difference between the two except the
Sigma was slightly warmer in color rendition. Since I do not make
enlargement bigger than that, that is all I needed.
As to resale, I never worry. I buy a lens to use not to resell.
Repairs, yes I remember the gentleman in Lisbon having trouble,
but do you also know people who have been successful in that
same city with Canon repairs?
Just my 3 cents from real hands on experience with the lenses.
Peter K
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
