At 7:41 PM -0500 3/27/04, Johnny Johnson wrote:
At 03:17 PM 3/27/2004 -0600, Tom Pfeiffer wrote:

Low light AF issues, flash exposure inconsistency and the lack of Kiron
lenses?
;-)

Hi Tom,


Was the reference to Kiron and inside joke between you and Ken? Reason I wonder is that I've got a Kiron 105mm in Olympus mount that's sharper than my Canon "L" glass. I guess maybe I shouldn't have been surprised at that since the L lenses are zooms and the Kiron is a prime but I was expecting that 25 years of advancements in lens design would have bridged the gap.

Later,
Johnny

I have a Kiron 105/2.8 macro for Nikon, and the 100/2.8 USM Canon lens, and I really can't tell the results apart. The Kiron is almost as good as the old 105/4 Nikkor, and better than the 2.8.


Strangely, while the Kiron extends to get close and doesn't reduce its focal length hardly at all, the Canon has a greater working distance at 1:1 even though its effective focal length is a lot shorter.

Kiron's lenses were many times among the very best from Japanese manufacturers. The most famous one is the first 70-210/3.5 Series 1 Vivitar.

--
   *            Henning J. Wulff
  /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
 /###\   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to