First: thanks to Steve Jolly, Andy Chang, Rob Studdert and everybody not mentioned for answering that fast, that's really amazing!
Second: Hi Steve With "Standard" in this context I mean a normal weight lens, an A or K lens compared to the M-Series lens of the same type. I talk about manual or A lenses here. In other words, are the lenses of the M-Series only slower but lighter than the A/K-Series and otherwise +- identical or is the quality of the lens not the same or even totally different to the a/K-Type? Simple said, is the formula: heavier, faster lens = better visible picture quality, usually true? As far as I have read, that's not true for the K50mm 1.2 lens, the 50mm 1.7 or 1.4 are told to be sharper. The 50mm 1.2 is a lot heavier and bulkier. I have it and like the very bright viewfinder with it, I use it for close-ups at home. I do not carry it a lot with me, and the filter size is 52mm instead of the 49mm and 58mm of the other lenses I use mostly outdoors. a) How many of you have ever missed an important shoot because maximum aperture of the given lens was (for ex. 2.0 instead of 1.4 or even 1.2 on a 50mm) not enough for the light available. As a result, do they now carry faster lenses or a flash or a tripod or faster film or all of it with them ? compared to b) How many of you missed an important shoot because they left their heavy photo equipment at home. I just bought a slightly used Pentax Espio 928 with Remote for 25 Euro over the internet as backup solution to my SLR and to be left in the car to be ready anytime and to take some self portraits with the infrared remote:-) I wonder, how good the photos will be and will test it in the next weeks. happy photo shootings Markus Maurer > what really makes me wonder: > Does anybody care about the size and weight of the lenses they use daily? > Do the light "M"-Series lenses still exist and is anybody favoring them > instead of the faster heavier lenses?
