Stefan... on my rectilinear Sigma 12-24 I would beg to differ - at least
experimentally. Flat on pictures of walls are in focus everywhere on the
wall, for example.

-Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stefan Gerris
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:59 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EOS 16-35 vs. 17-35

On Tue, February 6, 2007 18:09, Henning Wulff wrote:
> At 7:49 PM -0500 2/5/07, Bill Gillooly wrote:
>>That's pretty convincing.
>>
>>Mr. Bill
>>
>>
>>
>>Cotty wrote:
>>>I presume you've seen this?
>>>
>>><http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/16-35.shtml>
>>>
>>>I've already made my mind up and will be picking up a 24mm 1.4 L in the
>>>spring.
>>>
>>*
>>****
>
> The 24/1.4 is fine for what it is: an
> exceptionally fast wide lens, but it is hardly
> outstanding. You need to stop it down quite a bit
> to get sharp results in the corners. This lens is
> nothing like the 35/1.4.

You guys keep in mind that the focus plane of wide-angle lenses isn't
really flat, right!?

Cheers, Stefan



*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to