On 10 Aug 2004 at 20:26, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > One anecdote does not science make. Just because > you are very satisfied with a given lens doesn't mean > there isnt something better out there that will > perform better given toughter test conditions like much > higher resolution films/sensors and/or more flare prone shooting > conditons. I suggest you try some of the newer > 6 element MC enlarging lenses at close range with a bellows & > really fine grain film for comparison and also > with some really bright reflections in the image > to test the flare resistance. If you are satisfied > that is all that really matters but it doesn't mean > that is as good as it gets. Also, if you are into > 1:1 is is a known fact that the symmetrical designs > are much better for 1:1 than any non symmetrical > could ever hope to achieve. They make lenses JUST > FOR 1:1 that suck at infinity wide open but will crush everything > else at that 1:1 magnification.
John this is just getting stupid now. I suspect most people here are talking real-world and Pentax and likely K-mount and screw at the peripheries. I (like most other people here I assume) couldn't be bothered with too much BS to get what is generally a very acceptable image from my K mount lenses. Pentax lenses with FREE elements are high contrast and damn near flare free and provide more sharpness than the *ist D and most all readily available mainstream films can resolve, what more do you want? How many late macro lenses have you used? Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
