The only complaints about crop factors and telephoto's I've run acros are about 85's. Not many people are happy that their uber-pricey portrait tele's are now too long for general use and the 50's don't have the bokeh of those 85's. The biggest complainers seem to be the Canon users (but Canon 85 f1.2L's are ridiculously expensive).
-Adam Aaron Reynolds wrote: > By the same token, though, the strongest desire for full frame sensors comes > from those with older wide angle lenses that they wish to use at their > originally intended angle of view. > > I don't think I've ever seen a complaint that went "I'm mad because my 200 > 2.8 acts like a 300 2.8". > > So performance of wide angles is of paramount concern. > > -Aaron > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subj: Re: Full Frame/Canon > Date: Fri 2006 Aug 25 2:23 pm > Size: 727 bytes > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > >>If the problem is the sensor, there is not much you can do about it with >>lens design. >> >>However, since SLR UWA lenses are extreme retrofocus lenses the light >>coming out the back side is not at the extreme angles that it is from a >>normal UWA. > > But it's still more extreme than with longer lenses, isn't it? The > conventional wisdom is of course that digital sensors are more sensitive > to those angles than film, of course... > > But I don't know a lot about it, or even care. I was just trying to > point out that it seemed unfair to draw conclusions about lenses in > general based on the behaviour of wide-angles. > > - Toralf > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
