Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 5:08 PM -0500 1/11/02, Dante Stella wrote: >On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Lucien wrote: > >> > The URL is >> > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=514596 >> >> According to Chasseur d'Images' test, is not such a good lens. >> > >I wouldn't be so dismissive unless CDI did the same test with a >conventional lens and did better. Looks pretty damn good to me. A good >shot that you get is better than an excellent shot you miss. > >Dante > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html According to Canon's MTF chart the 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 are both considerably better. Admittedly, that's a very high standard, but you pay a price both in money and performance for the reduced weight. - -- * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html