[quote name='Rasho' date='02 July 2010 - 01:45 PM' timestamp='1278074759' post='805']
Aha, I figured that extreme borders are mostly irrelevant, zhat can-t be said for borders
[/quote]
I think it's a limitation of English - strictly speaking, border/edge/margin all describe the outer limit of the frame. A border is the place where two areas meet - just like national boundaries.
I can't really think of a word that describes the area within a border, yet not in the centre.
[quote name='Pinhole' date='02 July 2010 - 02:27 PM' timestamp='1278077253' post='806']
I think it's a limitation of English - strictly speaking, border/edge/margin all describe the outer limit of the frame. A border is the place where two areas meet - just like national boundaries.
I can't really think of a word that describes the area within a border, yet not in the centre.
[/quote]
Periphery or outskirt?
[quote name='edge' date='02 July 2010 - 03:46 PM' timestamp='1278078375' post='807']
Periphery or outskirt?
[/quote]
Actually we distinguish between "border" and extreme "corner".
Thanks for the nice review.
Klaus how it compares to the Canon 15-85/3.5-5.6?
[quote name='Alex.K' date='08 July 2010 - 09:03 AM' timestamp='1278572631' post='893']
Thanks for the nice review.
Klaus how it compares to the Canon 15-85/3.5-5.6?
[/quote]
I'd rate it somewhat better.
I need a lens for the Canon 550D for foto and video. New Sigma 17-50 do you recommended?
Sorry for my english.
The AF performance is LiveView/Movie mode is not as good as on Canon lenses.
I currently have a Nikon 18-70mm which isn't a bad lens at all. I have thought about upgrading to an f2.8 18-50mm lens. I am not impressed enough with the Nikon 18-55 f2.8-- it is good optically but its performance doesn't justify its price tag and it lacks VR. So I'm thinking about the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 OS.
The question is, is it enough of an improvement over the Nikon 18-70 to make it worth the upgrade???
Would you consider it as a significant improvement (resolution, CAs) compared to the 18-50 2.8 EX MACRO ?
Regards
Michael
[quote name='michaelgruen' timestamp='1282489957' post='2026']
Would you consider it as a significant improvement (resolution, CAs) compared to the 18-50 2.8 EX MACRO ?
Regards
Michael
[/quote]
What is "significant" ? A decent copy of the old 18-50 is certainly a very good lens.
The 17-50 is better but whether the difference matters to you is hard to tell from this side of the screen.