EOS-Digest wrote:
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:53:58 -0600
From: "Cal Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: EOS EF-S weaknesses
Now it appears that an EF-S17-85 is around 650EUR while the 17-40L is
around 700. So where's the cost saving for the customer?
Ok, the former has IS, but the latter is L and can also be used on 24x36,
And the former has a 5x zoom while the latter has a 2.35x zoom. So a second
lens is required to cover the same range.
ok, I was maybe focussing a bit too much on my own needs.
I can pretty much cover the whole range with existing lenses,
except for the wide end below 20mm.
But I guess this will be the same for a couple of people.
Regarding difficulty to make an EF-S lens a sharp one, I guess
I was wrong to assume that you "just make everything 1.6 times
smaller/wider". After second thought I think you will also have
to make it resolve "1.6 times the line pairs".
Which is of course a challenge.
Regarding cost vs. performance, I do indeed hope Canon comes
out with a fixed focal EF-S; something like a EF-S17/f2.8 to
cover the 28mm range.
br/Stefan.
--
PGP encrypted email preferred. PGP public key:
http://blackhole.pca.dfn.de:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1D42A873
More info: http://www.openpgp.org/
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
