- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: all about the glass
In the days of no digital photogrphy, the lenses would set the
limits to
resolution, sice film can resolve more than 100 lp/mm. Not many
lenses can.
Today, as digital technology gain market shares, the sensors
Alan,
It's highly unlikely someone shoots sceneries wide-open. From 135 up
these really commands f/8 and tripod. And under these conditions I
have found the SMC 135/2.5 combined with Provia 100F to result in bit
too vivid colours for my taste. Also, the above lens delivers
good
every camera user community I've been exposed to... seems convinced that
their lenses are at least as good if not better than the other brands.
I noticed it also. It goes farther. On one Minolta group, for
example, I noticed that people took for granted that multi-coating
was invented by
Well, you seem to have hit the nail on the head. All of the above (Opps, the
below). Plus the tendency to claim mine is better than yours regardless of
what the facts may be.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been thinking in the wake of some recent discussions of optical
quality that every
From: Matt Giess [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Increasingly, manufacturers are
tailoring optical quality more precisely to price class as they learn
not only to engineer quality in but also to engineer it out. The days
of
a cheap lens potentially being a great lens are passing. This may
account for
, if this is true then it's not, as somebody suggested,
all about the glass. It's either all about the cameras (which differ
a lot more in features and user interface) or all about the perception
of the glass.
For example,
I though until last week that Pentax famous low distorsion (0.5%)
28/3.5 lens
6 matches
Mail list logo
