>> I don't understand the point of a wide angle zoom.....
On 21/4/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: > >It's simple: convenience and speed in use. Many photographs do not >require the absolute maximum in lens performance, any hand-held >photograph is giving up 20-30% of a len's performance. I'm not a big >zoom lover, but for some things a zoom lens enables you to obtain >photos that you would otherwise miss due to not having the right >focal length on the camera. > >The FA20-35 is a very good fit to a lot of my work. It produces image >quality nearly comparable to (not equal to..) hand-held primes when >stopped down to f/5.6-f/8 (my usual working range), it is small and >light for its range and speed. It works well when wide open. I know >the FA20, FA28, FA35 are better performers, but this one is good >enough for a lot of subject matter and offers the right range of >flexibility with regards to field of view. The DA16-45 was also very >good, but I didn't like its size, weight and balance as much as the >FA20-35, and I think the latter has nicer rendering qualities as well. > >It would be interesting to see how the 17-40L on the Canon 10D >compares against the FA20-35 on the Pentax *ist DS. That's a more >comparable test. Hmm. Maybe I can borrow my friend's 17-40L and do >some fun comparison testing since I still have the 10D body... > >Na. Waste of time. ;-) Har! Thanks for the insights. For my part, if I'm shooting wide and it the focal length is not right for the shot, I just *walk* ;-)) BTW, I'm settling in nicely with my Treo 650. It's pretty capable and much more stable than my Samsung Palm phone. Just got some retractable 2.5mm headphones, and just installed a car kit - - Treo enablement is starting to rival Pentax enablement..... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________
