Whoops again. Make that the DA 16-whatever :-) Bill
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 1:25 AM Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 2:09 AM > Subject: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor? > > > > So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors and are some > lenses > > now less useful than they were on film bodies? > > I'm coping just fine so far, but I would like to get the FAJ 16-whatever > when it's available. > Currently my shortest rectilenear is a Sigma 24-50 and a Zenitar 16 fisheye. > Since I'm using only the center portion, the distortion is lessened > somewhat. For wildlife photography my Tamron 70-300 is now a 105-450, much > better for this purpose. > > > Are you using the *ist D in parallel with film bodies? > > Not really. The versatility of having variable ISO and adjustable white > balance beats either switching between bodies or changing film and/or > filters for different subjects. > > Also, for my purposes, I find my inkjet prints using P.I.M. II and nik > sharpener pro far exceed the quality of minilab prints, at least up to > 11x14. > > Bill >
