On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Ken Durling wrote:
A couple other reviews, which also compare. FM reviews also often compare,
and are generally very positive. There does seem to be some sample
variation, but whether it's in the lens or the user is up for grabs! ;-)
http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/17-40/index.htm
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml
Ken
I've been a 17-40 owner for about a year. The sample I have is pretty soft
on my 20d (although not as bad as the samples in this test) and I always
put it down to me being incompetant. However, I've recently been shooting
with my 1v and it's actually quite good.
Given that my other lenses (28-135, 50mm 1.8 mkI/mkII, Sigma 70-200 2.8,
and some borrowed lenses) all appear to work fine on my 20D, and
unscientific testing of the 17-40/20D combo suggests the lens is focussing
infront of where it should, could it be there is an incompatibility
between the 17-40 and certain bodies?
I think I need to do some proper testing to determine what exactly is
wrong with which bits my gear, or if it's another case of PEBCAP (problem
exists between camera and photographer!).
Regards
James
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
