--- Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Har, they'll try to wear you down. Next you'll be told that
the new zooms
> perform as well as primes (unfortunately even some of the new
"digital" primes
> aren't that spectacular in performance) and then you'll be
> told that loosing the aperture ring control made the camera
affordable to
> produce and that it's progress and that you'll get used to
it. Double har. Sorry if
> I sound a little cynical :-)
Well, you do, but then who cares? ]'-)
I dislike zoom lenses, always get better results with primes
even in the Canon system where they've put oodles of money into
their L zoom lenses. The one Canon zoom I've always liked is the
70-200/2.8L IS, but it's a damn expensive, huge and heavy thing.
I have no experience with Pentax zooms, but so far the primes
I've bought (DA14, A28/2.8, A50/1.4, M85/2, K Tak 135/2.5,
FA135/2.8, A200/4) have all proven to be very nice performers,
comparable in performance with the Canon primes I use. Some are
better than others, of course, but the DA14 is stunningly good
and produces beautiful results with the *istDS.
Regards the aperture ring control, it makes little difference to
me whether the control is on the body or on the lens: I like the
ergonomics of having the shutter and aperture on the body...
Although I suppose it does make things more complex if you want
to use a bellows and the aperture control is on the body. Last
time I used a bellows was, um, in the late Cretaceous period. I
think. ;-)
Godfrey
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
