On 28 Nov 2004 at 21:40, Julian Loke wrote:
> > P.S. I've found the 17-85 to be very similar in
> > optical performance to my old 28-135 by the way, but
> > the IS is a bit quieter and seens to perform a bit
> > better. If you were happy with the 28-135, then the
> > 17-85 is likely to make you just as happy....
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> I agree. The 17-85 has a newer generation Image Stabilizer
> that settles very quickly, unlike the second or so that
> was needed for the 28-135.
>
> Besides, the normal failings of such a zoom lens shot on
> film can be simply overcome with digital manipulation in
> RAW conversion. Failings such as light falloff, colour
> cast, and even chromatic aberration can be adjusted by
> tweaking a slider on the computer.
But: is such a feature indeed implemented on any EOS DSLR?
Or: *can* the camera distinguish each and every lens? (and adjust parameters
for it)
(just focal length is probably not enough, otherwise they wouldn't improve
optical design within the same focal lengths....:))
OTOH, for AF it already knows quite a lot, otherwise it couldn't send the motor
to a given position, without iteration.
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
