Graag verneem ik van (vroegere) gebruikers of deze lens op 2.8 bruikbaar is qua scherpte en hoe snel de AF werkt.
vg
Yannicks
Programmers are in a race with the Universe to create bigger and better idiot-proof programs, while the Universe is trying to create bigger and better idiots. So far the Universe is winning - Rich Cook
Programmers are in a race with the Universe to create bigger and better idiot-proof programs, while the Universe is trying to create bigger and better idiots. So far the Universe is winning - Rich Cook
Photography isn’t creative. I know, those are fighting words. Please put down the pitch forks for a few minutes and let me explain the distinction I see.
Dank je wel, maar ik had deze vergelijkende test al gevonden.
Mijn vraag is eerder naar gebruikers toe van deze 17-35, wat hun ervaringen zijn naar scherpte en snelheid AF.
Programmers are in a race with the Universe to create bigger and better idiot-proof programs, while the Universe is trying to create bigger and better idiots. So far the Universe is winning - Rich Cook
het is geen slechte lens ,maar hij ziet alle hoeken vd kamer ...
... of misschien net niet (cfr. scherpte randen) .
Mag ik er vanuit gaan dat je spreekt uit ervaring als vroegere gebruiker?
Programmers are in a race with the Universe to create bigger and better idiot-proof programs, while the Universe is trying to create bigger and better idiots. So far the Universe is winning - Rich Cook
Ik heb hem ooit getest naast de 17-40 f/4 en de f/4 versie was al véél scherper in de hoeken.
Dat vreesde ik dus al en hoe was de overall scherpte op 2.8 en 4.0 in vergelijking met de 17-40?
vg
Yannicks
Programmers are in a race with the Universe to create bigger and better idiot-proof programs, while the Universe is trying to create bigger and better idiots. So far the Universe is winning - Rich Cook
Comment