Quote:
Originally Posted by CometGuy
Doug,
I've heard the 100f2 is very slightly better than the 85 f1.8 (a number of people on the digital_astro list have commented about this, I don't actually have either lens). Between the 100f2 and 100f2.8, if you didn't have a requirement for macro I would problably go with the 100 f2. Although the 100f2.8 is very sharp, it is quite a long bulky lens (its nearly the size of the 200 f2.8).
Terry
|
Agreed Terry,
the 100 f2 has a very small footprint(
) compared to the f2.8.
But I am still worried about the "horrific CA" commented on in many of the web reviews - those guys are commenting on bright objects in daylight, the stars are even more critical on lens flaws...so I worry!!!.
And, as IIS member Dave has stated - the f2.8 is the only non L lens they'll use at his pro studio...And!! that pic you took is a beaut!!!
Signed
Confused from Hahndorf
Doug
