On 10/18/2013 10:14 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
You are missing the point. Because of the crop factor, FF lenses are larger/heavier than APS-C, which in turn are larger/heavier than m4/3. The fact that FF bodies are relatively not much larger/heavier than APS-C doesn't change the lens size/weight equation. Unless FF can achieve significantly better results, why would anyone get it?
Aahz, I can give you at least one example when the above statement fails. Pentax SMC DA* 16-50/2.8 is within 10% the same size/weight as Sigma EX 24-60/2.8. Given that Pentax is somewhat longer on the long end of the zoom if crop factor is taken into account, the comparison is also approximate. Yet, Sigma is a full frame lens which I quite like, whereupon Pentax is cropped one.
Please let us not start the argument of how good the results can be achieved with different gear. Because I can also suggest that by applying the same notion over and over, it would turn out that the very best camera produced by Pentax is Q-7. It is of course under certain specific definition of what "good result" is.
Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
