02-25-2011, 02:01 PM
I have a question on 35/2 vs 17-35/2.8.
From the results I conclude that in some aspects 35/2 apparently might be somewhat worse than the venerable zoom? It is one step faster and much cheaper, but if f/2.8 suffices, 17-35 is very practical range.
Are 17-35 FX tests in the pipeline, - and how do these two compare?
From the results I conclude that in some aspects 35/2 apparently might be somewhat worse than the venerable zoom? It is one step faster and much cheaper, but if f/2.8 suffices, 17-35 is very practical range.
Are 17-35 FX tests in the pipeline, - and how do these two compare?