Said to be excellent, but when you get that wide, opinions vary. I've also
heard pretty bad distortion at 16, but otherwise excellent. And with the
low-noise capacity of Nikon's DSLRs now, why not f/4? I'm loving my 70-200.
Can't tell any difference between sharpness, and the weight is considerably
less.
--Bob
On Feb 14, 2013, at 5:07 PM, Bill Pearce wrote:
> newer, slower, but perhaps better. I'll stick a moistened finger in the air
> and try to tell where the Rockwell breeze is blowing today. Could be
> different tomorrow, though.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|