I was just cheking dpreview.com's review of the 5D. It says, yes on prime lenses at wide angles and large apertures light falloff and edge softness can show up. Keeping that in mind it should not be a problem. With the way I shoot when using wide angle I'll almost always have the lens stopped down anyway.
I could have afforded a new body and lenses a year ago. It's all wishful thinking for me at present. Tom C. "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered." >From: "Aaron Reynolds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>,[email protected] >Subject: Re: CF v SD Cards >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:10:00 -0400 > >And those L lenses aren't legacy, really -- compared to what we're talking >about when we say "Pentax legacy lenses", L series glass is very new. >Surely at least for the last five years they've been designed with digital >as a primary consideration. > >-Aaron > >-- >http://aaronreynolds.ca >http://battersbox.ca >http://hardballtimes.com > >-----Original Message----- > >From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subj: Re: CF v SD Cards >Date: Wed 2006 Aug 23 6:02 pm >Size: 3K >To: [email protected] > >I suppose that's possible. But even with reported edge softness of Canon L >glass on the EOS 5D (probably at selected apertures) it appears to be a >runaway hit, so I wonder how bad it can be. > > >Tom C. > >"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or >numbered." > > > >From: "Aaron Reynolds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > >Subject: Re: CF v SD Cards > >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:56:00 -0400 > > > >But Tom, what full frame bodies deliver really good results with old > >lenses? I mean, comparable to the same lens on film. > > > >What you desire just may not be attainable with today's tech. > > > >-Aaron > > > >-- > >http://aaronreynolds.ca > >http://battersbox.ca > >http://hardballtimes.com > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subj: Re: CF v SD Cards > >Date: Wed 2006 Aug 23 5:19 pm > >Size: 1K > >To: [email protected] > > > >The lens and shutter release are also irrelevant on their own. :-) > > > >The issue for those of us who like to whine and bellyache about the lack >of > >a FF sensor body for our legacy non-DA lenses is not one of an APS-C >sensor > >being inherently of lesser quality, it's one of our not being able to use > >the lenses as intended. > > > >It's aggravated by the likely fact that as sensor prices continue to >drop, > >it would be economically feasible at least for Pentax to produce a FF >body. > >Whether that makes good profit sense after having saturated the market >with > >cheap APS-C bodies is another question. > > > > > >Tom C. > > > >"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or > >numbered." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > >Subject: Re: CF v SD Cards > > >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:55:49 -0400 > > > > > >That's not entirely true, but we'll let it pass. > > > > > >Bob W wrote: > > > > > > >That's not really true. Smaller film formats than 35mm did not take > > > >over from 35mm film. Just because a digital sensor is smaller than a > > > >35mm frame doesn't mean that it is lower quality. Really the size of > > > >the sensor is irrelevant on its own. > > > > > > > >-- > > > >Cheers, > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>not sure really. But it follows an historical trend: people prefer > > > >>little & less quality than bigger & better quality. > > > >>I expect this to continue... > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >-- > > > > > >Its easy to understand why the cat has eclipsed the dog as modern > >America's > > >favorite pet. People like pets to possess the same qualities they do. > >Cats > > >are irresponsible and recognize no authority, yet are completely > >dependent > > >on others for their material needs. Cats cannot be made to do anything > > >useful. Cats are mean for the fun of it > > > > > >P. J. O'Rourke > > > > > > > > >-- > > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >[email protected] > > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > >-- > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >[email protected] > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > >-- > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >[email protected] > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
