Rob, please now, spare your BS, I honestly doubt you would notice the difference in sharpness as a print, or at anything less than 100% view in Photoshop...
As for the rest of it, well, you may be partially correct, perhaps it SHOULD be better... You know, I think that all the lens manufacturers have been leading us around in circles for about 20 years regarding image quality, and that's just from my experience with older glass. I certainly wasn't using cameras 20 or even 10 years ago... I'm using old lenses now and finding them the equal or better, optically to the newer lenses. -Shawn -----Original Message----- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 7:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Samples from DA14/2.8! On 8 Jun 2004 at 14:03, Shawn K. wrote: > I have to disagree with you here Rob. The 16-45 has CA problems worse than this > that I've seen, so it doesn't surprise me, especially since this lens is 14mm, > and that alone is a difficult thing to accomplish... The difficulty in producing good wide angles is generally associated with their extreme WA coverage it's not a function solely of the of the FL. The smaller the area of the projected image behind the lens the easier it is to produce the lens. There are some very low distortion very cheap sub 5mm lenses being produced for small sensor digicams. At it's price and given it's limited scope for use I'd expect it to be near perfect. > I honestly think the > resolution of the lens is beyond the capability of the istD's sensor.... That I can assure you it is not if you are referring to the Pentax samples as examples. > I've seen much worse examples of CA, > particularly of the FA 24mm lens. Which out of the array of lenses I own has the poorest CA performance of the lot. > Maybe you are trying to get Pentax to make some last minute quality > upgrades by complaining loudly, I don't know. I'm just being honest. As am I. > The > pictures weren't amazingly good, but then again, the lens is 14mm's, and it's a > 2.8, and it's going to debut at less than 700 dollars. The A 15mm is about > double that, and has problems of its own, so you tell me which lens is the > better bang for the buck. The A15/3.5mm is US$900 at the most and it's usable on all Pentax bodies so you tell me which is the best value? > By the way, everyone knows that in camera sharpening even on the highest > setting does practically nothing. All the image settings in camera make > very slight changes actually, and the sharpness is the most slight of them > all. Strangely I can see the difference between settings. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
