Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/04/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Same experience here with Canon lenses. Both my old 20-35/2.8L and 17-35/2.8L produce consistently much better images than the 20/2.8 and 35/2 primes, and just a tad better than the 35/1.4L and 24/2.8. The 28/2.8 maybe the cheaper lens in that focal length range, gives about the same quality of the L zooms. Ed El 09/04/2007, a las 01:15, Will von Dauster escribi?: > On Apr 8, 2007, at 7:44 PM, Robert Schneider wrote: > >> As is comparing Leica primes to a Canon zoom. Granted, Canon has >> more than a few primes that can be considered underachievers, but >> all of their primes will test better than a zoom covering the same >> focal length. > > Actually, I find the 17-40mm f4L produces a better image at 20mm > than the 20mm 2.8 "prime." > > Though I'm also waiting a little while for the teething problems to > abate before plunking 5K down for an M8. > > Will von Dauster > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >