J.C.
how about trimming irrelevant cruft from your posts? I'm guess that
there were about 400 lines of "dead wood", almost half of which were .sigs.
On 4/15/2010 10:35 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
How many times do I have to tell you to make the point?
A zoom has to do much more than a prime so the zoom cannot
be "better" or even equal to a prime with BOTH using state of the
art designs and optics, period. Whatever they do to improve
zoom performance over the years can also be applied to primes.
I think that you are confusing physics with market realities. I don't
think that anyone is doubting that it would be possible to make a prime
that outperforms any of the ultrawide zooms on the market. The reality
is that (to a first approximation) nobody is doing so.
The lens manufacturers seem to think that nobody is interested in prime
lenses. How many image stabilized primes (under 400mm) are made these
days? How many prime "kit lenses" are there?
The analysis of "would people rather buy three primes to cover the range
of 10-20mm or one zoom?" seems to always come up with the answer "one zoom".
--
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.
