Well, I only have one lens rating, "professionally acceptable". Beyond that IMO it is all mystic mumbo-jumbo, and below that it is all junk. But I think I have said this before.
graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" -----------------------------------
Quasi Modo wrote:
Don the domain name rather gives you away. A brief analysis of the market opens an opportunity, yes: D/DS have been successful releases not matched with commensurate lens production/adjustments for crop factor (+ issues with 35mm lenses at certain focal lengths => discontinued production) => shortages of AF lenses.
This becomes more and more truistic for auto-focus as we take into
account prices paid for second hand versions of still in-production
lenses Vs averages for those out of production and supposedly rarer. The most interesting part is claiming manual focus virtue in its
cheapness and profitability. Pause for reflection... Signs point
to increased lens production Don so those returns will be more
difficult to sustain but good luck.
Endow an Australian with the acronym AO and you make him a happy man, Shel. With regard to manual focus lens collection, optical quality and/or superiority to AF is the classic fallback position. It was assumed that you were part of this manual-focus clique (pretty much what it is) based on your defensiveness and immediate resort to ad-hominem re my anonymity. Therefore, the fallback of optical superiority was only a matter of time.
Finally, it's amazing how few of these head to head comparisons between F/FA/DA/DFA and A/K/M etc lenses see the light of web. I'm all ears.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 06:35:47 -0800, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Did I say that older lenses are "superior?" I just said there's a market for them. Some older lenses may be superior to newer glass, but, Anonymous One, it's necessary to define superior. Different lenses have different fingerprints, as it were, different optical qualities, and depending on the look and feel one wishes to achieve, an older lens, with low contrast or less sharpness, or different bokeh, may be superior to a newer lens for a given task. If you desire to use only newer glass, that's your choice. But don't go putting words in my mouth.
And I do have a small collection of vintage cars, and while they are not "superior" in many respects to newer cars, they are in some ways, and they certainly provide a pleasure and gratification that newer cars don't.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Quasi Modo
Let the market decide, Shel. If you want to collect lenses and that floats your boat, by all means do. But the only delusions are indeed yours if you think a) they're consistently and noticably superior optically to their younger AF siblings and b) they're worthy investments. By all means collate the relevant data as you see it, talk to someone who actually designs lenses for a living, preferably with the company concerned, learn the history and find yourself completely debunked as I did.
Anyway we're here to learn not impose idiosyncratic mindsets but if it were larger items such as older cars the (de)merits of collection become immediately apparent.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 06:09:10 -0800, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
HAR! If you pay much attention to anything this antonymous poster,
Quasi
Modo, says, you'd be deluding yourself. Rob Studdert is probably right.
There's still a very strong demand for manual focus lenses throughout
the
world, both from users and collectors.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Cory Papenfuss
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Quasi Modo wrote:
Manual lenses = too much hassle in this day and age. We are the Instant Gratification Generation. If I didn't filter my lens browsing to auto-focus only I'd be there all day. (I think that captures the sentiments of ~90% of ppl in the market for Pentax lenses)
Great news then... so the 10% of us that like to tinker with quality old gear won't have to pay as much for it. A DSLR with
manual
lenses is still instant gratification, there are just a few more
steps to
do along the way.
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.5 - Release Date: 3/29/2005
