> Well....as a working photographer who has 2 D60's the reduced sensor size > really does not bother me at all. What matters to me is the quality of > the image, and in that respeect the D60 delivers. I think this full frame > stuff is WAY over blown, but to each his own.
The number of photographers who shoot with a 17mm, or a 20mm, or even a 14mm may actually be higher than you think. I agree that such lenses have no use in the fashion world, but photography means more than that. For architecture nothing beats the 14mm tilt&shift, for reportage nothing beats a 20 or a 28-200 (or maybe a 35-350, although the 35 end may not be wide enough sometimes) I can't speak for others, but when I first saw a picture shot with a 15mm fish-eye, I thought "Wow! Fantastic! I have to buy one, no matter how expensive it might be." Let's say that 14-20 are extreme cases, but a 28mm lens is very common, and if it suddenly starts to behave like a 45mm it will be almost unusable. Anyway, it doesn't matter how many photographers need ultra-wide angle lenses. The point is that the ones who already have these lenses will not be able to take advantage of them with a D60 (and I suppose that if they already have bought these very expensive lenses, this must mean that they need them). That's why I think that the full-frame sensor is the most important feature of the 1Ds. This will allow the 1Ds to be bought and used not only by photographers who don't need wide-angle lenses, but by any photographer (provided he's rich enough). People who would like to go digital, but didn't by now because they have invested lots of money in lenses, will be finally able to take this step without losing their investments. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
