eckinator wrote:
2010/2/26 John Francis <[email protected]>:
The DA* 16-50 is [...] quite
good fairly close up, too - in fact it's easier to fill the frame with a
subject using the 16-50 than it is with the 50-135, because quite often
the minimum focussing distance of the 50-135 can be the limiting factor.
if you want to shoot kids up close with the 16-50 better have a smear
cleanable filter on - lens to subject at closest distance on mine is
so short a big dog could almost lick the front element... and kids'
arms are longer than big dogs' tongues... ]=)
Big dogs' tongue smears and small cats' nose-prints have both been
cleaned-off my 16-50, so I can heartily agree with you. :-)
And I've shot interiors as well as other stuff in confined spaces with
the 16-50 and can attest to its suitability for that. A terrific hunk
'o glass, IMHO.
-bmw
--
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.
