Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>>Weeelll... Can*n does have the 17-85/4-5.6 IS, which is 27-136mm eq.
>>
>>When you figure that the 20D is at least 2 stops faster than the E-1,
>>for equivalent image noise, that becomes the eq. of an f2.0-2.8 lens....
>>
>>
>
>But I have not counted the 17-85/4-5.6 as being in the game. It's
>exactly the right focal length range and, as you say, the 20D is two
>stops faster than the E-1 for equivalent image noise. Fine for taking
>pictures... once the focus is achieved.
>
Ahhh, a previously unstated criterion. Caught me off guard there. :-)
>Unfortunately, good high ISO
>performance by the body doesn't help me see the image in the viewfinder.
>That's why I've been concentrating on 2.8 glass even though expensive.
>
>
A couple of questions.
Have you tried a lens like that on the 20D? I just don't find the Tamron
Di 28-300/3.5-6.3 to be particularly hard to see through. dpreview said,
"The EOS 20D gets an all new (not seen on any other SLR) nine point AF
system which has its AF points in a diamond pattern. It's quite
noticeably faster than than the EOS 10D (and thus my 300D) and has
better low light working range (-0.5 EV compared to 0.5 EV)."
My bet would be that the 20D will focus better, and certainly faster, in
light low enough that I'd have trouble focusing manually with an f2.8
lens. (I was wrong about my statement about focus trouble at 300/5.6 in
a dim room, it's actually f6.3. Some shots focused fine, by the way,
where the light was a bit brighter and/or there was more contrast in the
subject.) Any chance of trying out the 20D with this or a similar
aperture range lens?
And related to that, how often do you expect to be focusing manually
with such a lens? It's not the kind of lens I would use for shots
needing manual focus. I usually carry along a macro lens or a Zuiko
50/1.4 (just like a faster, closer focusing 85/2 on the 300D and fits in
a pocket, adapter attached.) for such things.
I'm sure you know I'm not trying to sell anybody on anything. Just
saying "out loud" the sort of things I think when considering such
things myself. I would be seriously considering selling the
24-85/3.5-4.5 and getting the 17-85/4-5.6 EF-S, were it not for the
unresolved specter of a FF body in the future. If a 5D were to appear,
the 19-15 and 28-300mm lenses cover a broad range and the 24-85 becomes
a useful backup. Much more than with the MF equipment, with digital, I
always want a back-up where possible. Of course, a 300D with 17-85 makes
a nice body/lens back-up, too. Has the built-in flash too, Hmmmm Too
many permutations....
Well, I need to receive the payment for my last project and pay off some
other stuff before I need to seriously consider any of this myself.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|