> So perhaps you should get the facts straight before attacking someone.
"No, I didn't get anything wrong. And I'm not "attacking" or insulting you. "Nothing but praise for the DA14? Surely you are joking. I certainly recall at least a dozen times you've posted your disappointment with that lens here, saying that you found the DA16-45 a better performer," ----- No, Godfrey, I've never expressed disappointment with the DA 14 even once, let alone a dozen times. In fact I like it very much. I have said that my copy of the DA 16-45 performs better at 16 mm than my copy of the DA 14 does. That is not an expression of disappointment with the DA 14. I do recall that you got different results comparing the two. That's fine. But please don't twist my reported results into something they're not. ----- "and then said how you didn't like the rendering of the DA16-45 as well." ----- I think you've got me confused with someone else. I have never, and I repeat this as emphatically as I can without using caps, I have never said that I don't like the rendering of the DA 16-45. I actually like the image quality of this lens very much, and have never said anything otherwise. I may have reported that a prime or two outperforms the DA 16-45 at comparable focal lengths. So what? Don't primes often outperform zooms? One really has to twist hard to get from this to saying that I don't like the rendering of the DA 16-45. Do you generally object whenever I compare my lenses according to the results I get from them? Do you object when anyone compares lenses, or is it only results that differ from yours? Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
