On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 10:13:13AM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > On Oct 25, 2007, at 8:42 AM, William Robb wrote: > > > ... A 14mm lens on an APS-C format camera isn't all that ultrawide. > > It's matter of accommodation and perspective. 91 diagonal degrees is > pretty darn ultrawide to me, it's just that I shoot with the 14mm and > 21mm so much of the time it *seems* relatively normal. > > I remember when 84 diagonal degrees ... 24mm lens on 35mm format ... > seemed ridiculously exaggerated and wide. :-) > > Godfrey
I hear you. For the first five or so years my kit consisted of just the 50mm lens I bought with my SP II, augmented by a cheap 80-200. A year or two after I switched to K-mount I did buy a 28mm at the same time as replacing the 80-200 with the much nicer M version. And, for many years, that was as wide as I could go. Eventually (maybe 10 years ago) I picked up a Vivitar 21-35, and found that sufficed for the few occasions I wanted something wider than 50mm. Then, with the K10D, I picked up the kit 18-55 (to give me a light walking-around combination on the *ist-D) and the 10-17 (which I had wanted ever since it was announced; I'd had a chance to try the 17-28 on a film body on the first NorCal PDML get-together, and thought it was a lot of fun). So for the last year I've had more wide angle cqapabilities than ever before in my life. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
