More to the original point -- if one want the magnification of a 135 format 300/2.8 on a format 2/3 its size one should purchase a 200/2.8.
It's that easy. Collin >Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:27:59 +0100 (CET) >From: "Jan van Wijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Good point Collin, > >One other thing I never see mentioned is that the size and weight >reduction for these 'APS' size lenses will be (much) less for >teles than it might be for Wide-angles. > >A 300mm f/2.8 will have a front-lens of just over 100mm by definition! > >Not much weight or size to be saved in my opinion ... > >With SLR wide-angles with retro-focus designs, where the fron-lens is >often much larger than the calculated aperture, it makes more sense to >me that size can be lower for a smaller image area. > >Regards, JvW
