OK - let me rephrase that. That does it! I'm going to run over all my
CONSUMER-GRADE zooms with a truck as soon as I
get home! :-)
Tom C.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, January 26, 2001 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Primes vs. Zooms: Unusable Sharpness?
>In a message dated 1/26/01 8:58:34 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
><< That does it! I'm going to run over all my zooms with a truck as soon
as I
> get home! Actually thank you for this insight. >>
>
>Not so fast. Consider that "consumer" zooms don't produce the sharpest
images
>(negative or slide), there are some kick-butt zooms out there, if you don't
>mind old gear, a ten year old PENTAX f/2.8, 80-200 zoom being one.
>If you don't mind "old" gear, any five year old "pro" PENTAX zoom can hang
>with most any new third party prime, and many of the new ("straight", not
>limited) PENTAX primes.
>When you compare the old, "pro" zooms with ordinary primes, the differences
>(if discernible) would be unremarkable
>There are also "third party" zooms that kick-butt too, the Vivitar 70-210
>(NASA) f/3.5 (62mm filter) is a stunningly good lens, rivaling the best of
>the OEM manufactured lenses and standing by itself, rivals many of today's
>primes. But it's now nearly 30 years old and getting scarce.
>Many OEM f/3.5 (constant) zooms are also sterling performers, able to stomp
>most "consumer" grade zooms in the dirt.
>
>Mafud
>Zawadi Imaging & Media Company
>Atlanta, Houston, Ontario, CA, Naples, FL
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-
>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.
>
>
-
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.
