Very good point. Perhaps on the *istD, variable aperture isn't such a problem - except for the slower F4 speed. Would be nice to be constant aperture 2.8.
Any idea when the 16-45 is really going to be available for purchase? Bruce Monday, December 1, 2003, 7:43:12 AM, you wrote: RB> If you set the aperture from the body (as you have to on the *istD for RB> example) then aperture does not vary - unless you are shooting at an RB> aperture wider than is permissable throughout the zoom range. RB> My Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 behaves like a constant F4 unless I try and shoot RB> wider than that! I wouldn't generally look to shoot this lens wide open RB> anyway, although have on occasion. It can be a bit of a pain on the RB> MZ-S, but on the istD you wouldn't generally notice. RB> Pentax will soon have a constant wide zoom for D'hood though! >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 01 December 2003 15:26 >> To: William Robb >> Subject: Re[8]: Digital lens questions >> >> >> I had been looking for a 17-35ish zoom that wasn't variable >> aperture, but have not found one for in that focal length >> range. The only ones are the Tokina 20-35/2.8, Sigma >> 20-40/2.8 and the Pentax 20-35/4. The best the 17-35 range >> gets is 2.8-4. >> >> Certainly the wide end is where the digitals (smaller sensor) >> have more issues. There just isn't a constant aperture zoom >> that goes wider than 20mm available for Pentax. >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> Monday, December 1, 2003, 6:31:48 AM, you wrote: >> >> >> WR> ----- Original Message ----- >> WR> From: "Bruce Dayton" >> WR> Subject: Re[6]: Digital lens questions >> >> >> >> That does look interesting. Too bad it is not already >> out. I'm sure >> >> I will have moved on before then. :( >> >> WR> If you haven't used zooms much at weddings, something you >> may not be >> WR> familiar with is the problems associated with using >> variable aperture zooms >> WR> and fill flash. >> WR> As you zoom, if the aperture closes, your fill ratio gets >> thrown off and the >> WR> backgrounds change density. >> WR> It may not be a big deal for some, but for me, it changes >> the look of the >> WR> pictures. >> >> WR> William Robb >> >> >> >>
