On Fri, 2 Nov 2001 19:29:04 +1100, you wrote:
>I think remarkably sharp images can be obtained from most 'consumer grade'
>zooms *at their best aperture*. I base that on viewing Kodachromes projected
>to about 6ft across (using a very sharp Leitz lens for the projection.. :-)
>Sure, many 28-whatever zooms have questionable quality, but it is quite easy
>to see when a slide is sharp and if it is, surely the tests are valid.
I don't claim this to be "remarkably sharp," and besides you can't
tell much on the web, but this photo was taken with the lens that
people love to trash - the recent Canon EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 USM, which
came as the kit lens on my Elan 7. . I think it's even rated lower
than "consumer grade," like "entry level" or something, and I did
upgrade after a few months. But in the meantime I got quite a few
pictures that I thought were "remarkably sharp" for a $100 lens.
Of course I get *true* remarkable sharpness from my older Canon MF
lenses, most of which cost me less than $100! But they are all fixed
focal length. Nonetheless the FD 35-105mm f/3.5 is supposed to be
The point made above is very true about "best apertures." I know of a
site that rates most of the Canon FD (MF) lenses at each of their
apertures, if anyone is interested contact me off-list.