For people like me, who prefers primes, this was a very correct move. Until now we had the large and now discontinued 15mm and the FA 20mm. The 14mm fits right in in this kind of line.
You are partially right, as I will not buy the 16-45 because it is too close to the 14mm, but the zoom would have been an intermediate solution anyway. DagT > Fra: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > What I meant was that these 3 lenses were too close or overlaping each > other, and they have been released within a very short timeframe. Why bother > the 18-35 when they were going to release the 16-45? Why a prime 14 when > they already have a 16-45? Why not 14-?? in the first place? The only > logical explanation is that the 14ED was so superior in optical performance > they believed an extra prime 14 was justified. However, I have reservation > on this theory and people really like super wide zooms these days. > > Regards, > Alan Chan > http://www.pbase.com/wlachan > > >What's wrong, did you hope for a 12mm, or a 12-24mm? > > > >I think they're starting with the most mainsteam lenses. Many consider > >anything below 20mm (for FF) as specialist area, and not for the mass > >market. > > > >I doubt if we will ever see DA lenses much above 20mm. Even Nikon 12-24 is > >said to be FF from 18mm and up. > > > >DagT >
