Ah yes! I thought so.
graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" -----------------------------------
Quasi Modo wrote:
I saw your sig and just had to take it up a level - you followed it as fluidly as if it were metered and focused in SAFOX VIII itself. I'm all for economising on lens expenditure, and not waiting ad infinitum for a lens release. I've seen a lot posted in several places about the superior optical quality of manual focus Vs AF lenses and have seen the arguments lose their legs within 100 characters.
As such, without putting too fine a point on the human instincts to collect or economise then justify, let's just keep a spade a shovel on manual lenses.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:45:29 -0500 (EST), Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Quasi Modo wrote:
Cory, if I had a buck for everytime I've had people talk lovingly of older, "quality" glass and end up not being able to cite, then convincingly explain why, more than three cases of the AF version of a given lens is inferior to the manual mount, I'd have a lot more AF lenses, at current eekbay prices. Take away the quality factor and you're back to build quality arguments, which are about as interesting as watching the D/DS write raw files to memory cards.
That's an impressively convoluted sentence, but note I never made the claim that older glass is necessarily "better" than new glass. I can tell you for sure that as far as I'm concerned it *is* better because I cannot afford to get high-quality new glass.
-Cory
************************************************************************* * Cory Papenfuss * * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * *************************************************************************
-- 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
