Hey Robb, Well, then there is something lacking in the photographic community. Like I said prime means 'best, first-class, foremost, select, superior, top, top-quality'. A fixed-focused/prime lens does not always meet the criteria. It's antiquated, perhaps like the illusion of metal beats plastic. Hopefully in our ever expanding digital world (not limited to cameras), and with the increasing plastics coming online to replace metal that is hundreds, thousands of years old, people will drop the 'prime' business. It may very well be a accepted term in photography, but 1) it doesn't make it correct 2) I bet there are underlying psycho-social elements in using such a term. For instance, how did it originate in photography? Prime is quite pretentious.
I grant the fact that the majority of sales are not to professionals, but to people who just want a camera or are amateurs. Most do not understand much about photography, and like the Auto or Program settings. A 'zoom' lens would of course be appealing to them, and in the entry-level, they do tend to be inferior, even to many 35mm PnS cameras with good optics and power zooming. Regards, Brad ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:49 PM Subject: Terminology lesson. Re: 28-105 vs 24-90 vs 35-105 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Brad Dobo > Subject: Re: 28-105 vs 24-90 vs 35-105 > > > People have a hard time accepting that a zoom, will > > beat some fixed-focal length or the 'pride' term is prime > lens. > > The accepted term within the photographic community is "prime". > It has nothing to do with pride, or quality, it is merely the > word given to identify single focal length lens. > The reason why some people have a hard time admitting that a > zoom can be better than a prime is because with few exceptions, > good quality prime lenses are better lenses than zooms of any > quality, based on accepted criteria such as resolution, > contrast, colour fidelity, and minimization of the six major > optical abberations. > > William Robb > >
