for the film cameras, if i have to take one lens and only one, it's almost always the 24-90. if i can take two, it is the 24-90 and the FA* 24 f2.0. i then use the 24 most of the time. the 15-30 is bulky enough that for the *ist D, i still end up taking the 24-90 and the 24 as my first and second choices. if i have the room, then i add the 15-30. it's large and heavy enough to give me pause, although not as heavy as the FA* 28-70 f2.8. the other reason is that i don't yet have an 82mm circular polarizer for the lens and so that makes it less useful to me on normal landscape shots. i want the haze/reflection reduction and increased saturation that comes about with a polarizing filter. if i end up getting the Sigma 12-24, i expect to carry it more often assuming i can do the same trick with the lens cover and a filter. if i can't, i probably will just stay with the 15-30. the Sigma 14 is sounding more and more attractive.
Herb.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Heiko Hamann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 4:53 AM Subject: Re: istD Histogram display > So you like the 24-90 on the *istD? I'm using the 28-105PZ which is > fabulous on my MZ-5n, but I'm still not convinced that it works as well > on my *istD. I am thinking about getting a 24-90 as it might be a better > performer an it is lighter. Maybe the 24-90 was even constructed for a > DSLR: it should have been the standard lens for MZ-S _and_ the cancelled > MZ-D. Who knows...
