Many, if not most, if not all of us, bought the FF lenses we did, in part because it was the focal length we desired to work with. Yes we can go out and buy a new wider angle lens to replace what's been given up with the 1.5x crop. I've the 14mm/2.8.
But in terms of overall desirability I find the 31/1.8 limited to be my favorite lens, by far, and I would like to use it digitally as a 31, not a 46. That's the point I believe Bob is making. Tom C On Nov 1, 2010 3:59 PM, "P N Stenquist" <[email protected]> wrote: > I would bet that to the naked eye, there is no difference is > resolution between a photo taken at 20mm with the DA* 16-50/2.8 and > one taken with a full frame sensor at 31mm with the FA limited. I know > from direct experience that the 16-50 is at least the equal of the FA > 35/2, and in fact it appears to be noticeably sharper at f2.8 and f4. > So wonderfully wider images are ours to enjoy. A number of Pentax > photographers have said the DA 12-24/4 is at least the equal of the A > 15/3.5, and it's only a bit longer. I believe a third-party > manufacturer makes a rectilinear zoom for Pentax that is 10mm at the > wide end as well. Full frame isn't necessary to achieve wide angle > images. > Paul > On Nov 1, 2010, at 3:24 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: > >> Paul, >> For me it means that all the old, sharp wide angle glass I own will >> deliver the FOV I thought it would when I first bought it. I >> understand the fact that the fov is indeed wider on 24 x 36 film. For >> me, the fact translates into wonderfully wider images. >> Regards, Bob S. >> -- 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.
