On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > I vote to have a non-prime clause added to the FAQ. Of course, the one > calling themselves, 'gfen' doesn't like me much anymore, so I don't see that > happening!
Actually, Brad, I still love you down inside, I just wish you'd stop being so purposely obnoxious. That said, I'll be glad to add "prime lens" to the list of phrases I added into the FAQ awhile back. However, I'm afraid you'll forever have to deal with camera people of all brands referring to fixed-focal-length lenses as prime lenses. For years, I tried to paitently explain to people that what they called "industrial music" was not, in fact, "industrial music" because it wasn't released on a given record label. It was a losing fight, eventually I gave up, referred to it by a more correct pigeon hole when I said something, and moved on. Eventually, your prime-versus-fixed-focal-length crusade will reach this point, as well. And, finally, I don't care how advanced the world becomes, a prime lens (thhpt!) will always be marginally better than a zoom lens based on the sheer physics of it.. Less glass which can be specifically corrected for a given length that doesn't need to be optimized for a range of lengths. Will the difference be noticiable by mortal humans? Probably not, though. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com <-> photography and portfolio.
