Just read a test report on the above (wish name was shorter) and quite a surprising concusion.
In the verdict said it had spectacular image quality and all-round performance.
And summed up with 'In many respects, it's better than Canon's highly acclaimed equiv'.
That's some conclusion and given that its somewhat cheaper, about £600 less, it could be a good alternative.
In the verdict said it had spectacular image quality and all-round performance.
And summed up with 'In many respects, it's better than Canon's highly acclaimed equiv'.
That's some conclusion and given that its somewhat cheaper, about £600 less, it could be a good alternative.
Comment