This is why I think a m43 system makes a nice complement to a DSLR system. It's not that hard to stick one in a camera bag. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message----- From: frank theriault <knarftheria...@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2009 06:48:22 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List<pdml@pdml.net> Subject: Re: GESO: On Low Light On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Ira Bryant <irabry...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > I don't think you are being fair. I wasn't really being unfair so much as ignorant. I simply didn't take into account the difference in sensor sizes. Having been made to realize that explains why the DA 21 is slower. > It is true that the DA21 is about the same size as the Lumix 20mm, but the > >Pentax lens is for a larger sensor. Two lenses, both the same size at about > the >same focal lengrh should have the same speed. However, if one lens has > to >cover a larger area, there is something that has to give. Pentax chose > that >something to be speed. They could have chosen a larger physical size > keeping >the same focal length and speed, or a longer focal length keeping > the same size >and speed. But they did not. They chose the same physical > size and focal >length with a slower speed. Understood. > I understand that some people prefer a larger lens to a faster lens. That's > why >some people buy the DA14 rather than the DA15. There is not really a > "correct" >choice. Agreed. > The answer to your question is that Pentax could have chosen to make a larger > >lens, but they didn't want to. As someone who has lived in Japan, I can > attest >that the Japanese have an obsession with making things smaller, > rivaling >America's obsession with making things larger. > > As I stated not too long ago, I love the DA21. On paper it looks like a > terrible >lens. I can understand why someone calls into question purchasing > a prime lens >with more barrel distortion greater than the kit lens. After > actually owning it, I >can say that the colors that it produces are worth way > more than the time I >spend correcting barrel distortion in Photoshop, if I > even bother. That's a ringing endorsement for the lens. I'll probably end up getting one because for daytime shooting it would suit my purposes very well. Still, too bad it's not faster. > > I own a K100D Super, though. I don't really see a reason for someone who > owns >a K10D or a K20D to want a pancake lens. Those bodies seem like > mistakes, or at >the very least "best we could do" bodies for Pentax. With > the K-m, K-x, and K-7 >though, Pentax at least has a consistent strategy with > their body and lens lineup. >With these bodies, the DA21 shines. Since I shoot with a *istD, the size of the DA 21 would complement the camera perfectly and make for a very innocuous street camera. > If Pentax can keep things small and incrementally add weather resistance to > all >of the lenses in their lineup, at the very least they will dominate the > home >market, which is all they really need to do. (To be honest, how many > Japanese >stocks do you personally own?) I don't own any stocks of any description. Hopefully I'll soon own a DA 21, though... ;-) Thanks for your thoughts! cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- 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. -- 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.
