Digital BW, The Print

Austin:

I know Michael and can state without a doubt that he has no agenda 
and is not biased in any way by any of the equipment manufacturers or 
other outside factors.  Granted you are reading his opinions, but his 
opinions are experienced and educated and he will not hesitate to say 
something is a piece of crap if it is.  He will also correct himself 
if he catches an error or ommission of his or anyone else's doing.  
He will give you his honest opinions and back them up with field 
data - unlike sites like Photodo etc.  You have to decide yourself 
what emphasis to place on information coming from any publication but 
I place a high degree of respect in Michael's opinions - they tend to 
mirror what I have found when I do the same tests.

Duncan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Austin 
Franklin" <darkroom@i...> wrote:
> > Here is a good review:
> >
> > http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml
> >
> > Duncan
> 
> I suggest that any information garnered from that web site be taken 
with a
> large "grain of salt".  Quite a few of the "articles" I've seen 
there seem
> to have a very strong agenda, and therefore they contain very 
biased, if
> not, incorrect/very one sided, assessments/(mis)information.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Austin