----- Original Message ----- From: "JimD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Chip, > Does the 16-35 take the place of the 20mm F2.8? > That is, at 20mm how does the 16-35 compare to the 20mm F2.8? > > I'm in this quandary as I got a refurbed 16-35 but it compares > poorly to my 17-35 in the brick wall/ sheet of newspaper tests > I've shot. I'll return the refurb this week.
Hi Jim, I replaced my 20/2.8 with the 16-35 earlier this year. I have been really enjoying the lens and have absolutely no complaint regarding sharpness or other. I haven't done any "newspaper" type tests but have used it extensively on four wheel drive (RV) magazine assignments where many shots have been reproduced as double page spreads in full glossy colour. I tend to use it mainly from wide open through to mid apertures for this type of work. I was a bit cautious myself when I first traded up as the 20/2.8 is such a good lens but haven't looked back at all. Regards, Tim www.timmunro.com.au * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
