Well, Christine, I suppose I ought to clarify here.
Christine Aguila wrote:
Boris: I don't mean to nit-pick here, and maybe I'm just reading your
post wrong, but you seem to assess "any" drawback as a "serious"
drawback. You'd agree, wouldn't you, that some drawbacks are more
serious than others? If so, it seems to me the DA 16-45 would fair
fairly well in lens assessment. Maybe I'm reading your post wrong. If
so, just ignore. :-) Cheers, Christine
I've a Tamron 28-75/2.8 that I bought from a fellow PDMLer (well,
PDMLeress, in fact, but that's beside the point). It is just shines. It
has certain problems as well, but they are minor. If Pentax comes up
with full frame body, all my problems will be solved then. I will have
moderate wide to moderate tele walk around lens at the ready.
Above Tamron is the only 3rd party zoom lens that I'd be willing to put
on my bodies knowing that I'd get superb image quality from it.
We had a company fun day just several days ago. Unfortunately the other
photo fellow ;-) couldn't bring his wide angle lens (Nikon 12-24 or
something like that) due to battery problems with his camera. So I shot
some very fine images, but no wide ones.
That's why I am started again on my search for a wider lens.
So in a sense, I am looking to replicate speed, sharpness, low
distortion (at 28 mm cropped it is not difficult though) and AF
precision of Tamron 28-75/2.8.
Boris
--
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.
