On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I assume you are being facetious here?
> I don't think that Nikon is wise in allowing other manufacturers to walk
> off with their market unless they are in fact being very savvy about the
> difficulties of getting good and cheap FF DSLRs. Of course
>> Unfortunately, Canon has apparently suggested that they
>> are intending to stay with APS-sized sensors for their "non-pro"
>>cameras,
>> and Nikon's expanding DX lens line suggests a similar posture.
>So the D1MarkII is non-pro? (1.3x crop).
The EOS1DMarkII is a patch on a first generation
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
guess the best compromise for versatility, quality and economy might
be the Vivitar AND the Pentax 24mm.
Rob Brigham
-Original Message-
From: kelvin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 04 June 2001 20:37
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Wide Angle Lens Dilemma
I think all the options you have
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
, anyway.
Hence , I think the uses for a 14mm (which I borrowed several times) is
too limited for consideration unless you already have a lens in the 20-24mm
range.
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 19:42:12 +0200
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Wide Angle Lens Dilemma
This is a multipart message in MIME
14 matches
Mail list logo
