On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 11:03:09AM -0500, Mark Roberts wrote: > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > >> From: Joseph Tainter > > > >> He was given the opportunity to claim that SSM would be faster, and he > >> didn't bite. So the only advantage is that it will be quieter. > > > >Joe, every silver lining has its cloud, eh ;-)) > > You know, I've been reading for years, from people I trust on this list > and elsewhere, that the primary advantage of USM/HSM/SSM/whatever is > that it's quiet rather than faster. No one should be surprised at this > point.
It's faster on the cheaper bodies, which have under-performing motors in the camera. With a semi-pro or better body, though, the actual operation of the focus process is around as fast with most lenses, although it has been my impression that the largest, heaviest lenses still make things difficult for the body. I'm looking forward to trying the K10D with my FA* zooms. I'm also expecting to find, from all I hear about the K100D, that the speed of decision-making in the auto-focus logic has been improved. I've used a Canon 20D with the 17-85 USM lens under indoor lighting, and there's no doubt in my mind that it is faster in operation than my *ist-D with my 28-105. I've also had a chance to check out the high-end Canon bodies with long glass, and a Nikon with the 80-400, and definitely found those to be faster overall, though not by a lot. I expect the K10D, with either the FA* 80-200 or DA* 50-135, to be faster in operation than my PZ-1p or *ist-D. My personal belief is that the DA* 50-135 will be slightly faster than the FA* 80-200, but I'm prepared to be proved wrong. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
