Chip Louie wrote:
> Hmmm, you say you have the slides to back up your claim.
> Are you now saying that have an EF 28-70 2.8L and
> EF 28-135 3.5-5.6IS and EF 17-40 4L and Sigma
>15-30 3.5-4.5EX DG DF lenses? If so for a guy that is
> always looking to save a buck or two you sure have a lot
> of lenses that overlap, what other lenses do you have?
You're speculating again! I never said I was trying to save
a buck.
As tests go, I believe the Sigma was tested by Pop Photo and
several other publications. I did not quote the magazine
when I said that the Sigma blew away the Canon. That was
my comment.
I will tell you that I have been disappointed in the EF17-35 and
from what I see of the 17-40 they can keep it. The 20-35mm
is sharper than both. If I were shooting digital I would go
toward the 16-35 if price were no object.
As to lenses, I often borrow them when I want to test a lens.
I had the EF70-200mm and compared it to the Sigma before
I bought the Sigma. I own the 28-135, 135 F2, and several others.
Currently I own but 2 Sigma lenses, the 70-200 and 105 macro.
We all have opinions Chip. My gripe was your reference
to the 15-30:
"I think this new Sigma when used on a small
sensor digital body like the EOS D30/D60/10D
series cameras can produce adequate, not great
image quality."
This would indicate that without having tried the lens you
believe it inferior.
Peter K
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
