About this religious thing: You make a big fuzz about that 1/2 cm, as you did with the telescopic tube of the Sigma 24-105. I know it's useless to point out it's still working and no dust or mositure in it. As it is useless to point towards your other religion which is saying if a lens sits in a metal tube, it's equal too "solid construction" - no matter how much plastics and small screws are holding the glass together at the inside. So, everybody has his little "should be that way, otherwise it's worse..." statements. As I already said, the focus by wire is a real issue to me and I don't care much about standard zooms. This one features 0.3 MFD at all focal lengths - how about the other two? Okay, the Canon goes down to 0.2 with it's Macro function, but then how to bring light in between?
Maybe it's not only to make it shorter but also to block the focus elements (14 elements...) from shattering around as you also complaied about in some Fuji tests - or was that Markus? And it's not only shorter, but also 0.5 cm thinner
than Canon which is for DSLR :o
Maybe it's not only to make it shorter but also to block the focus elements (14 elements...) from shattering around as you also complaied about in some Fuji tests - or was that Markus? And it's not only shorter, but also 0.5 cm thinner
than Canon which is for DSLR :o