Skip wrote:
> think I've noticed, due to posts about this lens, is that Canon may not
> be doing the best job of quality control. some rave abut the sharpness
> of it, others are disgusted by its lack thereof, and others seem to be
> somewhere in the middle. There may be a large range that fit within
> tolerance.
Hi Skip,
I suspect--and this is only an opinion--that the differences you cite are probably
due to differing standards of quality on the part of users, rather than to QC
problems in manufacturing. If one person's frame of reference when evaluating lens
X is, say, the 200/2.8L and ISO 100 slide film processed by a good lab, and
another person's frame of reference is the 50-200/3.5~4.5 and Kodak Max processed
through the local supermarket, there's a good chance that the conclusions reached
by each regarding the performance of lens X will be quite different.
fcc
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
