Evrim,
I agree with you that overall the 50 1.4 is sharper than the 28-80 USM I and
that you can see it in your pictures, I discribed this as 'crisp'.
But I must disagree with you that the 28-80 USM 3,5-5,6 Version I is bad. It
is as good as the 28-105 3,5-4,5 USM. The build is very good (IMO eve
So 28-80 performs at f8 the same as a 50mm at f2.8. I think that is not very
impressive. The point is, there is a noticable difference between these two
lenses, imho. When I tried my 85mm 1.8 vs 28-135, I was able tosee how much
sharper the 85mm was from a 4x6, which is amazing.
The 28-80 sharpne
sion.
Tom P.
- Original Message -
From: "Drikus van der Veen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: EOS 50mm 1.8 questions.
> Tom P.
>
> When you actually compare the weigthed MTF against
Tom P.
When you actually compare the weigthed MTF against eachother you see that
for the 28-80 at 50mm this is 0,71 @ f/4.5 and 0,77@ f/8.0 and for the 50
1.8 0,67 @ 1.8 -- 0,77 @ f/2.8 -- 0,85 @ f/8.
So it also depends on the aperture you use.
I myself have the 50/1.4 (wich has almost the same
2.8L
(non-IS) at 4.1, the cult favorite 28-105 (3.3) or the "incredible" 28-70
2.8L (3.9). It was tied by the 80-200 2.8L, though.
Tom P.
- Original Message -
From: "Drikus van der Veen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2
> I agree with your email but not this poiunt. The 50mm is a very sharp lens
> and nice contrast. THe 28-80 is a not a good lens, very soft. THere is a
lot
> of difference between these two lenses.
It totaly depends on wich version of the 28-80 you compare it to. The first
28-80 is quit good, s
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: "Icoz, Evrim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 8:24 PM
Subject: RE: EOS 50mm 1.8 questions.
> > Image quality... well the 50 f/1.8 will be better than your
> > zoom - but
Subject: RE: EOS 50mm 1.8 questions.
>
> > Image quality... well the 50 f/1.8 will be better than your
> > zoom - but not
> > that much. I would perhaps not buy this lens to get better
> > image quality
> > alone.
>
>
> Hugo,
>
> I agree with yo
> Image quality... well the 50 f/1.8 will be better than your
> zoom - but not
> that much. I would perhaps not buy this lens to get better
> image quality
> alone.
Hugo,
I agree with your email but not this poiunt. The 50mm is a very sharp lens
and nice contrast. THe 28-80 is a not a good le
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 11:00:04 +0300, you wrote:
>. But I do not believe there is any use to try
>to find one with metal mount. That's just wasting your energy.
That's probably true, but there are other reasons for buying the
earlier version - it has an actual depth of field scale on the lens
bar
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: "Jackrit Suthakorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 7:27 AM
> If I were considering to buy an ef 50/1.8, I would try to find a used
> 50/1.8 mkI with metal mount. Glass would be the same but different build
> quality between mkI and II
You would be very advised to get this lens. I do not agree with the build
quality issues unless you use this very veyr often or very demanding. Esp.
compared to the lens you have, you will see GREAT improvement.
You will be able to take shots much further away, but you woul dbe at
1.8
> Hi
Hi!
> I'm just new to this group, but I'm thinking about buying the
> EOS 50mm 1.8
> II lens.
> Anyone have one of these? What do you think of them? Worth
> getting if I
> also have a 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 lens?
Yes, the lens is great for the money. A bit loud when focussing (if you are used to
US
If I were considering to buy an ef 50/1.8, I would try to find a used
50/1.8 mkI with metal mount. Glass would be the same but different build
quality between mkI and II. I don't see much different in picture quality
from my 28-105 and the 50MkI ( but so much different with my
70-200L). Though I h
Hi All,
I'm just new to this group, but I'm thinking about buying the EOS 50mm 1.8
II lens.
Anyone have one of these? What do you think of them? Worth getting if I
also have a 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 lens?
What sort of distance increase on photo's taken with the on-camera (EOS
500N) flash with 200 speed
15 matches
Mail list logo
