what the hell are you talking about? All or nothing? What is that supposed to mean? I have already posted here that the difference in focusing ease between a wider lens and a longer lens is going to be proportional to the differences in focal lengths and I even suggested using a 20mm/200mm test because it would be easier to prove my point, but certainly not because there is no VISIBLE difference in a 35-40mm/105m comparison. Sure at some point the difference will become below the sensitivity of the human eye, like maybe a 50mm/55mm test, but not at 35-40mm/105mm it isn't. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Robb Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 10:19 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS- A challange to the list? ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Savage" Subject: RE: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS- A challange to the list? > And where is your scientific proof that Bill's findings are wrong? > > Your argument is just as anecdotal without it. No Dave, theory indicates that he is correct for a variety of reasons. Its just that it is one of those things that is on a sliding scale, and what Shel hit on is near one end of that scale, a spot where the difference isn't necessarily great enough to be overly visible to the educated eye. As an example, a 14mm lens vs. a 600mm lens would be somewhere on the extreme other end of the scale. The thing is, for John, it's all or nothing. For those of us who have learned to use a focusing screen to best advantage, it was at one time, merely a speed bump on the road of mastering the photographic arts. William (I'll take another comma, Alex) Robb -- 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
