I am not ignoring ANYTHING, zooms can never outperform primes all else being equal because zooms have to have a whole bunch of optical and mechanical compromises that primes DONT NEED.
So for a given focal length, speed, company, format, cost, etc , the PRIME will exceed the zoom on optical performance. Its so frikin simple and obvious, I dont know why you are still arguing this. What you are arguing is totally different, your comparing different brands, formats, models available so far in a given companies lens line, etc. NONE of that changes the very simple facts that zooms will never match let alone beat primes all else being equal because they are COMPROMISED OPTICALLY in order to be able ZOOM. i.e. a cheap prime will optically BEAT a cheap zoom and an all out no compromise prime will beat and all out no compromise zoom, and every price point in between. Am I making myself clear enough on this ? ? ? ? JC OCONNELL [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2008 5:06 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: DA 55-300 LBA What you're ignoring in your assumptions is that almost all the development that's gone into lenses in the last couple of decades has been into zooms. Particularly in the last 5 years there's been a massive improvement in the performance of ultra-wide zooms, which has not been matched with primes. In fact there's been only about 3 new full-frame 35mm ultra-wide primes introduced in the last 8 years (14mm's from Canon and Nikon as well as the upcoming Zeiss 18mm f3.5) There is one single prime wider than 18mm that can match the recent zoom designs for performance, and that's the Leica 15mm f2.8 Elmarit-R and even then it's at best a match for the Nikkor 14-24, even the recent Canon 14mm f2.8L can't match the Nikkor 14-24 nor can the 2001-era Nikkor 14mm f2.8 and none of the other 15mm designs can (Unsurprisingly, as the other 15mm designs are all early-70's variants on a single design). The only truly modern 20/21mm design out there is the C/Y 21mm Distagon, the rest date back to the mid 80's at the newest, and some are a decade older than that. The Distagon's superb, and outmatches anything else in the range including the new zooms, but no other 20 or 21mm is even in shouting distance of it. Oh, and a lowly Sigma is king wider than 14mm, the Sigma 12-24 handily beats the couple 12 and 13mm rectilinear designs available. Oh, and note I'm comparing Nikkor's costing $1800 to Leica's costing $3500 and the cheaper Nikkor Zoom wins. -Adam On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 4:51 PM, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ROTFLMAO > > NO prime of same cost is ever going to underperform a > zoom of same cost, they do less, but do what they > do better, > > I say this is hogwash unless you are picking out > very cheapo primes vs very expensive zooms. > > To be fair, you need to compare lenses of same > general cost/quality. DUH. > > The whole zoom feature adds a massive amount > the the optical design that isnt needed for > a prime so for same cost the prime will do > better at what it does. > > JC OCONNELL > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Adam Maas > Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2008 4:47 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: DA 55-300 LBA > > > Actually, Superwide zooms these days often exceed the performance of > primes, look at Nikon's recent 14-24mm f2.8, which matches or exceeds > any prime in its range except the Zeiss C/Y mount 21mm Distagon, their > older 17-35mm f2.8 AF-S is nearly as good, outmatching pretty much any > lens in its range except for the exotic German glass. Wider than 20mm, > nothing can touch the Nikkor 14-24. Nikon's 200-400 f4 VR is similar > in being able to match or exceed prime performance. > > Of course, either of these lenses is a significant investment ($1800 > for the 14-24, $6000 for the 200-400). > > -Adam > > On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 4:38 PM, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> In general I have found that most telezooms are softer >> at the long end than the short end and most primes >> at the same focal length as the long end of zoom >> will easily beat the zoom at the long end. For this reason, I try to >> avoid telezooms ( and wide zooms, and extended range zooms for that >> matter ). >> >> For some reason, the closer you get to "normal lenses" >> in focal length, the better zooms do, but super wide >> OR super long zooms, no go! >> >> JC OCONNELL >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of Toine >> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2008 4:26 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: DA 55-300 LBA >> >> >> I sold my 80-320 to finance this lba. My only problem with the 80-320 >> was lens creep while walking. Corner sharpness is a little better on >> the 80-320 which isn't a surprise for a FA lens. Contrast and image >> quality at 300 is better with the 55-300. At the wide end the 80-320 >> has very good image quality, maybe the best of the two. >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >> and follow the directions. >> > > > > -- > M. Adam Maas > http://www.mawz.ca > Explorations of the City Around Us. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
