Do you know if the F and FA version of the 50mm F1.4 and F1.7 primes are similar in performance? I got a F1.7 with a body and will test drive it this evening too. I do not like the look of the lens compared to the M/A versions but I got it for the coming K10D nest year :-)
But on a wedding job, you will carry a second body just for backup reason and with 2 bodies equipped with an 35mm and 100mm (on film) I could cover a lot of the important moments without swapping lenses. If digital zooms are indeed good and fast enough nothing speaks against a little comfort on the other side ;-) greetings Markus -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 3:25 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 16-50 f2.8 I still like primes. I shot all my studio stuff today with the FA 50/1.4, and I frequently shoot on the street with the 35/2. That's also my favorite for indoor people pics. But a lot of the best new Pentax lenses are zooms. some of them are excellent. No reason not to use them. I'm going to shoot a wedding Thursday (against my better judgement, but it was a request from the bride). Because I don't want to swap lenses endlessly, I think I'll use the DA 16-45 and the DA 50-200, the short one on the D, the long one on the K10 with SR turned on. I know they'll do a good job, and they'll make my job easy. Primes are great. Zooms are okay. Paul On Dec 2, 2006, at 8:54 PM, Markus Maurer wrote: > 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 -- 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
