-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 4:12 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: EOS should I change a lens?
Birnbach Michal wrote (edited for space): I own an EOS 3 and 28-135 IS USM + 75-300 IS USM lenses. I usually take landscape pictures using only slides (mainly Fuji Provia 100F, 400F ar Velvia). I 20x30 cm paper copies of better pictures. Only very rarely I enlarge to 50x60 cm if a picture is worth it. I have no experience with other lenses therefore my question. Is it worth for me to change these lenses? Canon 28-70 2,8 L and 70-200 2,8 L are rather out of my range (I'd have to spare money for ca. 2 years - but maybe it's worth?). I thought about Sigma/Tokina 28-70 2,8 APO and Sigma 70-200 2,8 APO or Canon 70-200 4L. After looking at the photodo www site I got an impression that if not Canon 28-70 2,8L then all the other "short" zooms are +/- equal to my 28-135 IS. OK maybe a little bit better but lower range and no IS. Is it right? Will I notice any difference? Please remember i'm not a pro and make pictures only for my own satisfaction. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- Ahhh, Sharpness, the holy grail for SLR users. If you like your results why change?! Your 28-135mm is every bit as good as the 28-70mm F2.8L at the mid apertures. Use F2.8L lenses when you need F2.8 to blur the background or to have faster shutter speeds. I have used my 28-135mm IS lens extensively (from portraits to landscapes) and no problems with sharpness. I have tested these lenses using slide film and projected them to 30x40 on a screen. Guess what? You can't see a difference at a viewing distance of 4+ feet. You have to go within 12 inches to see any differences. If I enlarge bigger than this, I use medium format, or digitize the output and take advantage of software that can render larger prints better than traditional means. As to a longer zoom? If you need a 70-200mm for landscapes you probably will not need F2.8, most landscapes are taken at F11/F16 with 35mm SRLs. I would recommend the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX HSM. Every bit as sharp as the Canon 70-200mm F2.8L and actually a tad sharper than the Canon at 200mm set to F2.8. I say this from actually tests and experience. Its about $US500 used. Disclaimer: For those who think beige is the only color for a lens, or those who refuse to believe a lens that does not bear the Canon logo cannot be sharp, please ignore my comments and do not reply. Peter K Hi Peter, Okay I'll bite! LOL! Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
