Re: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90?

Mike Johnston wrote: The qualifier is KEY: simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less elements will be better. ala aspherical designs vs spherical only or zooms vs. primes, etc. Well, this makes no sense to me. Why would a designer add another element but to

RE: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90?

to increase functionality? Like closer focusing?? -Original Message- From: Mike Johnston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 5:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90? The qualifier is KEY:

Re: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90?

J. C. O'Connell wrote: to increase functionality? Like closer focusing?? That too! g keith -Original Message- From: Mike Johnston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 5:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better

RE: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90?

simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less elements will be better. I absolutely believe that statement... Well it seems bizarre to me. How can one be better if they're equally corrected?!? Either they're equally corrected, or one is better. Both things

Re: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90?

Aha! You mean ...fewer elements. Yes, I now understand... Mike Johnston wrote: Somebody said: simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less elements will be better. To which I replied: I absolutely believe that statement... So, Mike countered: Well it seems bizarre

Re: Lens Elements, WAS: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90?

J. C. O'Connell wrote: simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less elements will be better. I absolutely believe that statement... Well it seems bizarre to me. How can one be better if they're equally corrected?!? Either they're equally corrected, or