Jostein. I guess that's what I meant. COF is defined according to the wanted englargement. So, a plausible COF should not be the same for MF and 35mm. Or should it?
Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 11. februar 2006 11:12 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: Lenses for 645D? Hi Jens, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "Sharper" is also a COF issue, which means 35mm lens shots don't get > enlarged as much as MF shots. I thought this was the other way around. With a larger format you can enlarge more without revealing the COF. > A clever guy who has money to spend would start buying up Pentax 645 > lenses > in order to sell them at very good prices a year from now :-) This > way one > could make enought money to buy a Pentax 645D - for free, actually. LOL - Well, you may be right about that, if the prices of 645 lenses inflate the way as it has for K-mount lenses. Jostein
