On an APS-C digital camera, I'd bet my DA 12-24 will outperform any of those lenses. I think you're looking at things through the fog of your discontent. Paul On Aug 23, 2006, at 8:58 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 24/08/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I wouldn't call them cheap APS-C bodies. The *istD was probably the >> second most expensive Pentax SLR of all time. All of the bodies cost >> more or as much as recent Pentax film cameras. And they're all >> rather well made. As far as using the lenses as intended is >> concerned, they work exactly as intended. They merely crop >> differently. So my FA 35/2 is now a nice normal, my FA 50/1.4 gives >> me the performance of an $800 77/1.9 Limited at a fraction of the >> cost. I think that's what God had in mind when he created those >> lenses:-)). > > Yes, but I was hardly impressed with the WA view that my A16/2.8, > A15/23.5 and A20/2.8 provided on my *ist D. Yes I could replace them > with DA glass but from my limited experience I don't think I'd be > overly impressed by the results. My DA16-45 is just about to hit the > market. > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
