I am finding out that all lenses are good, but some are better, cost wise?
most shots will not show up the defaults of the lower cost lenses, only if
blown up to 10x there is a difference, pros look at this. 95% of the lower
cost DSLRs users are not pros.



"Voice Only" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 22:13:49 -0000, lid
wrote:

Voice Only wrote:
I'm hoping that someone can shed some light (hmm) on this for me.

I'm in the market for both a wide-zoom of roughly 24-70mm f/2.8 and a
longer
zoom of 70-200mm f2.8. My camera is a Canon 10d.

Obviously Canon makes the lens' I'm looking for, but at a very steep
price
tag for each (aka $1000US).

Are the lenses made by Canon that much more superior than the "pro"
line of
lenses by say Tamron, Sigma, or others? Do these lesser expensive
lenses
stack up to the Canon, or should I just save up for the Canon?

Independent lens tests are at www.photodo.com. These suggest that the
Canon EF 70-200/2,8 L USM is optically somewhat superior to the Sigma
AF 70-200/2,8 APO EX HSM. But this doesn't tell you all you need to
know: build quality, for example.

Andrew.

THANKS!

VO