Previous message:
> BTW, how sharp the A 1.2 is at 1.0 ;-) (the DOF at 1.0 is propably NONE,
so
> I would say that lens would be actually UNUSABLE for photography! You
would
> get almost nothing or every time the bad thing in focus. Like tip of
> person's nose, but not their eyes. Perhaps nice for creative effects, but
> at that cost? Canon snobbery, of course!
That's very interesting. Something I hadn't thought of.... It seems a quite
logical truism, but I would still like to hear from someone who's actual
used a name brand (Leitz, Canon) 1.0 lens to confirm this...
Also, a question; as DOF deepens the more you stop down a lens, would a 1.0
lens, perhaps because of all that much more glass available, have a
proportionately better DOF at say 1.2, 1.4, 1.7, 2.0, etc, etc??
Skip
-
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 .
