05-17-2011, 04:40 PM
[quote name='oneguy' timestamp='1305649737' post='8419']
Yes, it's still sharper from F2.8 and up than both. Cannikon still has a hole. They don't have a cheap F2.8 85mm lens. That's a hole. twice expensive. You have to pay twice more to get F1.8 lens even though wide open both are inferior.
[/quote]
Popo, I suspect this boy is comparing 85mm f1.8 on full frame from Canon and Nikon to 85mm f2.8 on APS-C <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
The APS-C measurements show the Canon and Nikon to be sharper <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> (and offer f1.8-f2.8 rang, obviously).. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Yes, it's still sharper from F2.8 and up than both. Cannikon still has a hole. They don't have a cheap F2.8 85mm lens. That's a hole. twice expensive. You have to pay twice more to get F1.8 lens even though wide open both are inferior.
[/quote]
Popo, I suspect this boy is comparing 85mm f1.8 on full frame from Canon and Nikon to 85mm f2.8 on APS-C <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
The APS-C measurements show the Canon and Nikon to be sharper <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> (and offer f1.8-f2.8 rang, obviously).. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />