09-21-2016, 11:47 AM
Quote:Canon 28-300L:What is your problem in this discussion? You brought up that Canon L lens... Not me.
92mm x 184mm
74.4mm x <span style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(244,247,248);">96mm </span>
But I'm sure you will tell us that there's no reason for the difference, right ?
I find that Canon L lens to be too high priced and too heavy, not a fan of that. Does not mean I should not point out that it does not really make for a good comparison to this 12-100mm f4 from Olympus! You wrote a whole article about equivalence not too long ago, so that at least should be apparent.
For the Canon L compared to the Tamron and Nikon one could make the case that the Tamron has too small elements, making it vignet rather heavy, and that the Canon's optics perform quite a bit better.
You made the same performance argument about the Fuji vs. the Oly, above.
But both the Canon 18-150mm and Oly 12-100mm seem to perform quite well, judging from their manufacturer's MTFs. I still don't get why they are not to be compared.