On 2 Jan 2002 at 8:11, Paul F. Stregevsky wrote: > By conventional thinking, a lens that is 80 percent as good as another at > 50 percent of the price is a better value. I propose an alternative > definition of value: cost per photograph taken. By this definition, the > cheapest lens nearly always must win.
Paul, Your equation doesn't work for me. Some of us are just prepared to sacrifice a bit more and buy the best available in order to provide the optimum potential (in the given format). I never want to be wishing I'd shot "that" shot with a better lens. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
