Ok, it all starts with a thread like this:
Subject- Which one to Use?
Post- Hey, which one is best? I gotta use it tomorrow morning, and I am not sure what will be better for me.
Then come the Options:
- Canon 70-200L IS 2.8
- Tamron 70-300 4-6.5
- Sigma EX 70-200 HSM 2.8
- Olympus CF-SB
And they leave you to guess all by yourself.
The Dilemma starts:
Which lens is best? Well, hands down the Canon 70-200L IS 2.8 is -by popular choice- the most renowned lens out there. Specially compared to Tamron, Sigma and Olympus optics.
And the thread takes off. The Sigma guy feels that his Lens is doing great for the money (less than two thirds of the Canon), and the Tammy/Olympus guys will miss and hit with comments like "My Copy of this lens could outdo a Canon 600mm 2.8 IS anytime, anywhere !".
However, what is NOT BEING SAID, is that the OP's intent the following morning, is to use one of these lenses for his own Colonoscopy. In such case, the obvious answer to the Thread (and unanimous, I would hope) would be the Olympus CF-SB optics, sporting great technology at the right size.
I hope I can get the point across, I love contributing on Lens threads, but the proverbial "What to buy, A or B?" without any other context information, or previous results (Such as look at this pic with my sigma 10-20mm, what is a better lens that will take away that diffraction and increase sharpness?) simply goes by largely noticed, but I am afraid, not very accurately addressed.
Does this suggestion make sense? Or am I the only one helping others choose their gear -specially glass- half blind?
Sound off !


