Interesting, I didn't know there was a powerzoom model of it....would there be optical difference since mine is plain old manual zoom? Oh ya, and I know the 24-90 is better, just looking for a good excuse to buy it :)
Brad Dobo ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gianfranco Irlanda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 5:58 AM Subject: Re: 28-80 v/s 28-105 > Brad Dobo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Heheh....I'm glad I'm not the only vain one! :) I have the > older FA > > 28-105mm 1:4-5.6 [IF]. I asked for comments on this before > (mainly hoping > > for someone to tell me it sucks so I could justify buying the > 24-90mm) I > > don't remember getting any. From my own limited experience it > is a decent > > lens. The new version with the AL elements is no doubt > better, lighter, and > > requires a smaller filter (dunno what size, but mine is 62mm) > > > Hi Brad, > > You made me recall a test in Spotmatic magazine: they compared > the FA 28-105 (the powerzoom version) to the 24-90. The 24-90 > wins hand down, especially wrt flare resistance and overall > sharpness. I don't know if it is available on the AOHC website, > though. > > Gianfranco > > ===== > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! > http://sbc.yahoo.com >
