BTW, what would be fair price for used 20-35/2.8L on Ebay for your opinion ?
Regards, Alex Z -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alex Zabrovsky Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 1:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: EOS Canon wide angle zooms Thanks guys. BTW, Jim, are you talking about 20-35/3.5-4.5 or 20-35/2.8L ? I figured out Photodo rates it quite high (20-35L) at 3.5 and Photozone rating says nothing but praising it and mentioned "slight distortions" on both ends which is very adorable for such wide angle. However you guys point out that there is no USM facility which is bad. I understand lacking USM I would loose FTM convenience, right ? (In fact I use this feature vary rare on my 28-135). Chip advised about 16-35 which sounds to be a killer, however is far out of my financial reach (and are extremely rare on used market and even used are very expensive). You also advocate for 20-35/3.5-4.5 USM and I think I would really consider one as well thanks to your favorable real-life report. I indeed wouldn't mind not a bit slower aperture for wide angle (anyway it is going to be used fairly stopped down in majority of situations of not saying always), but if this one indeed excels in distortions issue as well delivering fine optical performance (on-pair of probably very slightly behind the 20-35/L) I think this would be the way to go for me. I indeed do not intend to go digital in foreseen future (I set my goal for full-frame pro-grade DSLR to be available for under 1.5k$ (kind of 1Ds) which isn't going to be true within at least 5 years), besides of being invested in digital darkroom (Nikon IV ED film scanner + image editing station). I'll check he online rating for the 20-35/3.5-4.5 USM. Regards, Alex Z -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jim Davis Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 1:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: EOS Canon wide angle zooms "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote/replied to: >What about distortions issue with 20-35 ? > >Regards, >Alex Z Alex, I have the EF 20-35 USM and I like it very much. There is some distortion at 20mm, that's a given for any wide angle, especially zooms. But it doesn't bother me. The convenience and price of this zoom far outweighs it. I find on wide angle shots, framing by zooming is a must for me, as it's usually very hard to just move to get your framing right cause you have to move a long distance. And USM is something I want on all lenses, it's so darned nice. Those who say it's not a big deal just don't have it. The lens hood is a must of course, and it's a great one. The lens is quite compact but well built. If I wanted wider, I'd want to get a 14mm lens, and they are pretty darned expensive unless you really need it. 20mm is pretty darned wide too. I know, I know, you've never got wide enough, but we all have to live within our budgets and the laws of physics. Ask yourself just what you'll be shooting with a wide lens. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
