On 5 Jun 2001, at 15:43, Patrick Genovese wrote:
> First, let me thank all who replied to my post for the great feedback.
>
> Since I like using filters esp my circular polariser a non rotating front
> element is highly desirable. I know that the sigma 20mm and the 17-35
> both have non rotat
Len wrote:
> Remember that polarizers on wide angle lenses can give strange
> results because of the angle of view, especially on scenics or
> landscapes showing a lot of sky ...
this is correct - you will get shades of "blue-darkening"
across the wide expanse of sky = rather
Don't forget that filters suitable for such wide angle lenses may be obscenely expensive. I am lucky and am
able to use the Cokin P system filters on my A24/2.8, even though Cokin quotes them as being able to go as wide as 28mm only. I don't get any noticable vignetting at about f/11 or f/16 b
Francis Tang wrote:
>> I am lucky and am able to use the Cokin P system filters on my A24/2.8,
even though Cokin quotes them as being able to go as wide as 28mm >> only.
I don't get any noticable vignetting at
>> about f/11 or f/16 but I haven't really used filters on that lens at
wider apertures
Rob Brigham wrote:
The Vivitar Series 1 19-35mm zoom is about a third the price again and is pretty good
if you are on a real budget (doesnt sound like you are though). It really is very
good and very underpriced. Also has flare problems as do all non SMC lenses to a
degree.
I purchased t
First, let me thank all who replied to my post for the great feedback.
Since I like using filters esp my circular polariser a non rotating front element is highly desirable. I know that the sigma 20mm and the 17-35 both have non rotating front elements. But don't couldnt find the relevant info
One of my favourites has been the Tokina 17mm RMC.
In fact I have had 2 of these - the first was stolen in Fiji along with the rest
of my gear. It is manual focus, but who needs af on a wide angle
lens!
Bob
I would say the PENTAX FA* 24 f/2 EDIF is the ultimate if absolute
quality is you thing.
For versatility the PENTAX SMC-FA 20-35mm f/4 AL is the next best thing.
If price matters, the SIGMA 17-35mm f2.8-4 EX Aspherical is fantastic
(tack sharp in my experience - I use it a lot) but is a little p
kelvin writes:
> re: 14mm, I find that 20mm is the widest that I could ever find a practical
> use for... and 24mm was probably more useful 50% of the time, anyway.
> Hence , I think the uses for a 14mm (which I borrowed several times) is
> too limited for consideration unless you already have a
I recently bought the PENTAX SMC-FA 20-35mm f/4 AL and LOVE it. The
contrasty, full-frame sharpness, and distortion-free images have been
phenomenal. The lens also handles well, and is relatively small. Yeah, it's
f/4, but the one-stop loss vs. size is often handy.
It is, without a doubt, one
I have the older Sigma 14mm - the 14mm f3.5. I've been
pretty satisfied with it, though it's not something I use very
often. Here's a cat photo taken with it:
http://www.net-link.net/~cassino/stuff/01010702pandora_e1.jpg
The SMC F 17-28 fisheye zoom is a really interesting lens, but the
fishey
11 matches
Mail list logo
