But even if he could he'd only get a 4/3 image circle. For $1349 (after
rebate) he can get the new Canyon 16-35/2.8 L (version II). It's $170
cheaper, one stop faster, covers twice the image circle, weighs 140g
less and can be fitted with a filter (which the 7-14 can't). Granted,
the 7-14 covers a wider angle at 7mm than the Canyon at 16mm but the
difference is only 5% (114 vs 108 degrees on the diagonal). And the new
16-15/2.8 II is no image wimp on digital as were the earlier designs.
This one finally bests the Zuiko 18/3.5 as tested by the former champion
of the Zuiko 18/3.5 and 21/2 lenses as used on Canon full frame gear.
<http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon1635ii_a/c1635ii_a1.html>
But it's still a bit soft in the corners. Does the ZD 7-14 have better
image quality? I don't know but it would have to be awfully good to
make up for the all the other points such as price, weight, speed and
ability to use a filter.
Chuck Norcutt
Garth Wood wrote:
> And by the way, for anybody assuming that I'm unusually willing to put
> lipstick on this pig, I need only mention a conversation I had last
> evening with a buddy of mine who's a confirmed Canon shooter. While
> he's not ready to ditch his Canon bodies and lenses, he had little but
> *highly* complimentary things to say about Oly lenses (he thinks Oly's
> probably the best lensmaker/designer in the world right now) as well as
> the announced feature-set of the new E-3.
>
> And every time he handles my 7-14 DZ zoom, he always mutters to himself
> "If only there was some way to mate this to a Canon full-frame body..."
>
>
> Garth
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|