Ah, the beginning of a flame war. No need to disparage JCO here. He was merely stating an opinion, however misinformed it might be. Who was it who just said:
"It's sad to see this whole stupid "FF vs APS-C" horsepucky again be a bazillion message thread. Two misnomers make a religious battle it seems. I'll just take pictures and to hell with trying to discuss it." Do as I say, not as I do? Paul On Jan 1, 2007, at 9:02 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > Ah, my mail filters were disabled for a few hours during a system > cleanup and this nonsense was received... > > On Jan 1, 2007, at 10:04 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >> So you want a fast normal APS lens? (28/2DA)? >> On FF, you can get a killer 50mm F1.4 >> for much less money thats twice as fast. >> Hell, how much are the 43mm/1.9 FF lenses going for compared >> to the DA28mm/2? the 43mm/1.9 FF lens on FF would >> most likely be way better overall performance >> than the 28mm/2DA on digital APS I would think for several reasons... >> jco > > - There is no such lens as a "DA 28mm f/2 Limited". It's a lens I > would like to see produced as it would suit my needs and cameras well. > > - The FA35/2 AL is a perfect fast 'normal' for the 16x24 format and > is less expensive than the FA43. The FA43 is too long for what I > want. 28mm is a 'wide normal' for the DSLR format and I would like a > lens in that focal length. > > - "be way better overall performance" ... Since you have zero > experience with any Pentax DSLR you are just making cold air hot as > usual. > > My email filters are now restored to operation. Bye. > > G > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
