Alex Zabrovsky wrote: > > In fact, as can be observed on Photodo and inferred from numerous online > reviews and tests, the 28-70 L is one of the sharpest zooms available in its > range. I don't have one (yet), my own observations are only based from word > of mouth of others, online and magazine material though. > I'm surprised a bit you didn't find pure truth in this reports. Perhaps > there are variations between the samples ? Also, this one have been prized > in pretty much every public reports by its built quality as well (though not > to be mount-sealed as the new 24-70 L is advertised to be). > This point you also put is doubt. > > I like to hear various opinions even completely opposite about the same > product, that may yield the real picture. > > Regards, > Alex Z >
Well, I have seen "tests" that put the 28-70L at the same level as the consumer zooms. That's what I meant when I wrote "seems not overly expressive". Actually, I'm quite happy with what I have ;-) Also, Peter wrote it is quite comparable to the consumer zooms at mid range apertures. Now, that's not much of a surprise I guess. At f/8 or f/11 everything equals out, besides the real lemons perhaps. A Porsche at 50 mph is not much faster than a VW at 50 mph :-) But lets compare at 70/4 and see the difference.... Also, let's look at real world pictures. Contrast, color rendition, distortion ... There's a lot beyond sharpness. But the apparent build quality is really a little less than the 80-200/2.8. It HAS play (well, the 80-200 CANNOT show any play, because the whole movement is internal). It feels much better than e.g. the 28-135 IS, though. Thomas Bantel * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
