Looks like they beat the competitors to reviewing yet another spankin' brand new lens... Here
... and again found a winner, like it was the case with Sigma 35/1.4
Go Poland!
It would be nice if they showed some actual PHOTOGRAPHS taken with the lens!! I don't know of too many people who photograph LINES, NUMBERS, and CHARTS!!
paulski66 wrote:
There are photographs on subsequent pages of the review.
I don't consider those types of "pictures" Photographs. I'm talking about actual macro photographs of macro type subjects...i.e. bees, wasps, flower stamens, dew drops on flowers or blades of grass etc. "Real World" photographs...not dots, lines, and rulers.
If you're referring to the photos in Chapter 11, I still don't consider those "macro" photos. Those are still "test type" images IMHO.
While they're "better than nothing", I would still like to see some actual 1:1 close ups of "normal" macro subjects, as I eluded to above. (bees, wasps, flowers, spiders, dewdrops etc.)
Not knocking the lens by any means, I happen to own the non D.I. version of the EOS mount Tamron 90mm f/2.8 1:1 macro lens, and like it very much, so this lens would be very intriguing.
Looks like a nice lens. The price will need to come down a bit to make it a viable option as the Canon 100 non L is a great performer and less expensive.
Bees, wasps and flowers in January? In Europe? From the test results, looks like it's a very nice lens, well corrected for any aberrations and beating the original, which was renowned as one of the best medium tele macros.
From the test results, looks like it's a very nice lens, well corrected for any aberrations and beating the original, which was renowned as one of the best medium tele macros.