Of courses some are (imagine if not...). Yep as for vignetting, maybe distortion as well, FF lenses used on APS-C suffer less, proportionally than an APS lens on APS body. But those lens will sometimes (often?) offer CA for free as well and often less sharp as well, simply because they didn't need to be in the first place. But this is really hard to generalize. A cheap APS lens is usually ... not great at all and and older FF lense maybe a lot better (or not). Individual testing needed, really.
Just remember some lenses are not APS lenses though they have DA name. 55 is FF, 60-250 is FF, 200 and 300 as well, 40ltd is FF and 70 is debatable. 2010/12/19 Boris Liberman <[email protected]>: > On 12/19/2010 2:11 PM, paul stenquist wrote: >> >> Then why worry about the lens frame? A lens designed for APS-C will >> outperform one designed for 24 x 36. (They're both full frame. Just >> different frames.) Paul > > I opine (may be wrong, but that's my right) that some 24x36 designed lenses > outperform some 18x24 ones. In particular, some Sigma EX 24x36 lenses show > impressive degree of correction of geometric distortions. For my kind of > shooting it makes them particularly attractive given their price tag. > > You're however absolutely right that there are no "partial" frame lenses > here. Unless of course, we're speaking of circular fish eyes /grin/. > > 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. > -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs ---------------------- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ ... Laptop: Macbook 13" Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- 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.
