On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:15:40 -0700, "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote/replied to:
>I have used L lenses, Nikkor, Leica, etc. This is not true in all cases >and I speak from experience. I wrote the equipment review column in >Professional Photographer Magazine from 1994 to 2002 so I can tell you >about nearly every lens made. >Take a look at the alleged flawed Photodo tests. Compare the 35mm F1.4L >to the cheap 35mm F2. At F8 they yield identical resolution. Yes, and compare Photodo's rating of the 28-70L to the 28-135 IS and you will see virtually no difference in the ratings from 28-70. In fact the 28-135 beats out the 28-70 at several focal lengths and apertures. I guess nobody who spent big bucks on an L lens really wants to see those ratings heh heh. The 28-70, although slightly dated now, was raved about for many years by photographers who bought it. Amazing the power of money. I know, the build quality is superb :-) But then again, I could buy three 28-135s for the price of a 28-70. Some people have said, and it's true, that I've never tried a 28-70L. But I have two better lenses, the 50/1.4 and the 85/1.8 and frankly I haven't been that impressed. Which is why I'm selling them. Good riddance to old tech primes. -- Jim Davis, Nature Photography http://jimdavis.oberro.com/ Standard Poodles for fun BMW motorcycle for pleasure * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
