I probably owned an SRT-201 shortly after you had the 101, and like you, I couldn't afford the 1.2, in fact I'm not sure I was even aware of it. But I saved up every nickel and did have a ROKKOR PF 58mm 1.4. Once I reached "hobby affluence" in the 80's, I owned several 50mm f/1.4's. In fact I just sold the last one last year. Awesome lens, great old cameras.
You know, I wish I could get a nice split-prism, gridded focusing screen on a Canon Digital SLR without spending $4500. I really miss those. Thanks for reminding me of those things... Tom P. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > James B.Davis > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 6:22 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: RE: EOS Human Eye Equivalent > > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 18:00:15 -0600, "Tom Pfeiffer" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote/replied to: > > >Minolta normal lenses were 45mm, 50mm and 58mm. You're probably > >thinking of the 58mm, which WERE porpular in the SRT days. The 58mm > >f/1.2 was a legend (but don't tell Jim because it's too fast). > > Tom, my first SLR was a SRT101 and I had to have the 50/1.4 > with it. I was smart enough, maybe not rich enough to get the > 1.2. Nice lens, shame about the shoddy build of the camera. > The metering system was a thread inside the camera body that > went around little pulleys everywhere. What a joke. > > Basically I liked wowing people with the huge hunk of glass > on my camera that so obviously said 'PRO'. > > Course zooms in those days (1970) were unheard of. > > > -- > Jim Davis, Nature Photography, > http://easternbeaver.com/ > Motorcycle Relay Kits * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
