Peter Hancock wrote:
OK, I guess I simply don't understand the optics. Nevertheless, it's
clear that if you simply compare like for like in terms of equivalent
reach, the small format is lighter, smaller and cheaper:
Sigma 70-210 f2.8, full frame: 1345g; 86.6 x 184mm; filter 77mm; price
620 pounds
Sigma 50-150 f2.8, digital sensor: 770g; 76.3 x 135mm; filter 67mm;
price 450 pounds
I know which I'd rather carry. As I originally said, Pentax have also
announced two new upmarket long zooms for digital. It'll be interesting
to see whether Canon hold their line.
Peter
Whoa! What you are saying here is like saying, my Ferrri 599 uses too
much gas so I think I'll drive my Vespa.
How does a 70-210 or a 50-150 compare to a 100-400 ?????
Bob
--
/////
( O O )
--------------------oOOO-----O----OOOo-----73 de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Curiosity killed the cat although I was a suspect for a while........
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
