Guess it's the f/4-8 that have to be compared. The f/2.8 performance is likely pretty good for that aperture. I didn't go back and review the 28~70 f/2.8. I may later.
Jack --- Digital Image Studio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 06/08/07, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Apertures used notwithstanding, to my eye the 16~50 image is > somewhat > > sharper than either the 16~45 or 28~70 and virtually equal to the > 31. > > I know, an absolutely meaningless observation. > > They appear to be pretty close at f4, the lack of CA in the 16-50 > image really adds to the apparent sharpness, my only criticism of the > new DA* lens is the apparent halo or light spill from the bright > areas into the dark at f2.8 though by f4 it's virtually gone. > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
