Jan 23, 2005, 07:37
Okay, not the worst, that dubious distinction goes to the flakey old Stigma 17-35 POS.
But I've been playing with this highly-touted lens for the past week and I find it very disappointing. Autofocus in moderate light is horrible. It does not seem any sharper at f/8 than wide open at f/4 - and that's not especially sharp. And I see purple fringing in high-contrast areas, though this lens was known for NOT doing that.
This must be the most overhyped lens ever. Both my old Canon 28-135 IS and Tamron 28-75 XR Di lenses were sharper at comparable focal lengths.
Sure, I may have a bum copy. But from what I've read on various review boards, there seem to be quite a few bum copies floating around.
This one's going back to the shop, in exchange for the new Tamron 17-35mm.
:x
But I've been playing with this highly-touted lens for the past week and I find it very disappointing. Autofocus in moderate light is horrible. It does not seem any sharper at f/8 than wide open at f/4 - and that's not especially sharp. And I see purple fringing in high-contrast areas, though this lens was known for NOT doing that.
This must be the most overhyped lens ever. Both my old Canon 28-135 IS and Tamron 28-75 XR Di lenses were sharper at comparable focal lengths.
Sure, I may have a bum copy. But from what I've read on various review boards, there seem to be quite a few bum copies floating around.
This one's going back to the shop, in exchange for the new Tamron 17-35mm.
:x
_______________________________________
Everybody got to elevate from the norm!