On 3/30/08, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's nice, but they need to start putting some faster primes on the > > market. > > > Certainly true. > > > > There isn't much advantage in buying a 35mm f/2.8 lens when the 16-50 is > also an f/2.8, unless all you are going > > to do with the 35mm lens is macro work at closer ranges than the 16-50 > will allow. > > > Unless you like primes and prefer lenses without much vignetting or > distortion although you might argue that "It can be processed under PS > anyway". > >
The 16-50 doesn't vignette or distort much at 35mm. But it is much larger than any 35mm prime in a DSLR mount except the Canon 35L I tend to be a prime guy from a theoretical perspective. But I shoot more with zooms. Love the primes, but the zooms are more flexible and all three of my current ones are excellent performers. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
