-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ken Durling Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: EOS EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 16:34:45 -0000, you wrote: > >Some of us have seen the quality Jim has achieved with his 'consumer' lenses >and know that this has been through careful technique and constant attention >to detail. Now he has ambitions to make photography an even bigger part of >his life and he is moving 'up market'. Good luck to him. > >Bob Pendleton I concur. And I started out pretty much the same way as Jim - working with what I could afford. I got a lot out of my EF 75-300 and even that - perish the thought - kit 28-90. Now I'm shooting with the 28-135 IS, the 50/1.8 and the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro, and getting pretty sharp results across the board. Most of the rest of my really good glass is is FD, but my expectations are considerably higher now. Quite a bit higher than my budget. Hell, I'd love a 85/1.2L! That's why I wanted to get some feel for how the 24-85 is. I suspect that after shooting with my FD 24mm f/2.8 prime that I would find the distortion at the wide end of the EF 24-85 pretty disturbing if there were any straight lines in the shot. But it might be ok for carefully framed landscapes, which is mostly what I use 24mm for. And a bit of softness at 85mm might be ok, too, for portraits. The 28-135 acts like that. Anyway, I appreciate everyone's thoughts. Ken Durling Hi Ken, I'll chime-in and say that from what I can tell the EF 24-85 is right in the same range as the EF 28-105 and 28-135IS lenses. There seems to be no difference in the lenses in silver or black optically though someone said that the silver lens barrels don't seem to wear as well. It has been my own experience that once you log some time shooting with the "better" lenses you won't want to shoot with the "lesser" lenses anymore. A lot of people don't see the value of better lenses. I say this as a largely transparency film shooter knowing that most people shooting print film don't know what truly excellent C-41 processing can look like. All prints are second generation images and it's very difficult to make second generation images look really good without personal attention during the processing. So for many people there is very little or no difference in lenses unless the lens is a real dog. With so many people going to digital bodies with small sensors even a 6MP camera can display the differences in optical quality. With small sensors the short comings of lesser lenses are more apparent on these first generation images just as they are on tranny films. Having just gone digital myself I for one and VERY happy to have so many excellent "L" class lenses in my quiver. Plan for the future, it's almost here. Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
