Keith, What is to be gained is that those who don't have the lens but might consider it would have something to view. Some of the lens tests only show brick walls (helps with some comparisons, but not others) and some don't show any brick walls. A few have quite a bit to compare and some have almost nothing.
But if you all think it is of no value so be it. I'm not buying any more 35mm lenses anyway so no skin off my nose. Bruce Sunday, December 8, 2002, 4:50:30 PM, you wrote: KW> Why? KW> Once you have a decent print/photo from a lens, lte's say an excellet KW> example of good resolutino, contrast, etc., why muddy the waters by KW> saying you want more photogs to express THEMselves thru that lens? KW> What is to be gained? KW> You've already SEEN what the lens will do! KW> What are you looking for? KW> keith whaley >> Sunday, December 8, 2002, 3:17:21 PM, you wrote: >> >> DS> On Sunday, December 8, 2002, at 04:41 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> >> >> Dan, >> >> >> >> I thought that was what the lens gallery was for. >> >> >> >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> DS> Well, I love the lens gallery--and there are some great photos in >> DS> it--but it hasn't been updated in a couple years. >> >> DS> Plus, all the images from each lens represented is limited to samples >> DS> submitted by one photographer. Being able to see samples from a given >> DS> lens as used on different shots by a wider variety of shooters seems >> DS> like a big plus to me. >> >> DS> Dan Scott
