12-25-2010, 09:56 PM
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1293307075' post='5192']
Allow me to correct:
Optical Quality: 2.5 stars
Mechanical Quality: 4.5 stars
Price/Performance: 2.5 stars
And, yes, hardly can believe it myself, certainly expected more from it <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
-- Markus
[/quote]
Actually, same price tag than the Canon 24-105L but a longer range. So technically there's no reason why it should performed any better or even match it.
Again another indication that the differences between the brands are actually very marginal despite all fanboyism which tries to suggest otherwise.
Allow me to correct:
Optical Quality: 2.5 stars
Mechanical Quality: 4.5 stars
Price/Performance: 2.5 stars
And, yes, hardly can believe it myself, certainly expected more from it <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> -- Markus
[/quote]
Actually, same price tag than the Canon 24-105L but a longer range. So technically there's no reason why it should performed any better or even match it.
Again another indication that the differences between the brands are actually very marginal despite all fanboyism which tries to suggest otherwise.