On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, David Savage wrote: > At 02:59 PM 19/07/2006, Sylwek wrote: >> On 18.07.2006, at 21:33 , Mark Roberts wrote: >> >>> My other Limiteds (43, 31, 77) are all f/1.9 or faster. That's a lot >>> more than a third of a stop! F/2.0 and under is Limited territory for >>> me. I'd *consider* the upcoming 70/2.4 if it were under $500 (and if >>> I didn't already have the 77!) >> Yes, but but don't forget DA Limiteds are much cheaper than their >> faster, FF counterparts. FA 31/1.8 is about two times as expensive as >> having similar FOV 21/3.2, not to speak that DA is much smaller, >> lighter and takes 49 mm filters instead of 58 mm... > > They're cheaper because they're slower.
They also cover a smaller image-circle. And there may be thousands other differentiations between these lenses. On spec only you cannot tell why one is cheaper than another. Take the 24-90 and the latest 28-105 as examples; both 3.75x zooms, at comparable FLs with comparable apertures, yet the prices are so different. But I stronbly object to Sylwek's (of all people) comparison of the 31 with the 21 on the grounds that if you mount one on a horse it gives you the same fart as if you mount the other on a pig or sth. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
