I begin to wonder a bit: with the transition to digital most of you seem to like Zooms now where in the analog world most of you used primes for best results. What happened here?
just wondering Markus, who still uses film for a few weeks :-) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 2:22 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 16-50 f2.8 Yes, the 12-24 is clearly an amazing lens, probably the best DA thus far. It will be a good companion to the 16-50. Paul On Dec 2, 2006, at 4:36 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > 12-24 to cover wide, use your 21-35 for normal. > > -Adam > > > John Francis wrote: >> I was almost convinced I wanted the 16-45 until the announcement >> of the 16-50/f2.8. I never got round to buying the previous >> (film-camera) short zoom to go with my 80-200, but this time I'm >> probably going to get both of them. >> >> My problem is what to do until the 16-50 is available, especially >> since I might want something wide before then for a couple of events. >> I've got an old Vivitar manual focus zoom, but that's only a 21-35. >> I'm considering picking up the fisheye 10-17 (especially with the >> rebates extended until Jan 9th.), but that leaves me with a bit of >> a gap in the mid-wide-angle range. I suppose I could buy the 18-55 >> kit lens with a K10D, but I'm not sure how much I'd use it once the >> 16-50 comes along. The size isn't likely to matter much on a K10D, >> especially with the grip, but I suppose I could hang on to it as a >> walkaround lens to keep on the *ist-D. >> >> Decisions, decisions ... What would you do? >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 07:48:57AM -0800, Michael Chan wrote: >>> I have been restraining myself from buying the 16-45 for months now, >>> anticipating the weather-sealed lenses. I had not heard about a >>> 16-50 2.8, which would likely be out of my budget range anyway, and >>> with the rebate it's getting really difficult for me to control my >>> LBA shakes. Is the 16-45 that far head and shoulder above the kit >>> lens? I've been pretty impressed with the kit, but it definitely >>> has >>> its shortcomings. >>> >>> On Dec 2, 2006, at 7:20 AM, David J Brooks wrote: >>> >>>> Quoting John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:11:40PM -0500, David J Brooks wrote: >>>>>> Anyone heard if its happining. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would love to get this lens and the K10d >>>>>> >>>>>> Dave >>>>>> >>>>>> Equine Photography in York Region >>>>> >>>>> The new lenses aren't due until March of next year. >>>>> Realistically this probably means I won't be able to get my >>>>> hands on one before my Las Vegas trip in early April :-( >>>> We are heading there in late April for our 25th wedding >>>> anniversary, >>>> so maybe i'll be able to get one by then. >>>> >>>> Dave >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Equine Photography in York Region >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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
