advertisement


Sorry I know I am boring (another lens ?)

Garyi, I know what you mean - I previously used a cheaper Canon 100-300 with my EOS1n and the lens was way behind - I since bought a 70-200 L which is incredible. Unfortunately lens quality is not just about iamge sharpness, bokeh etc but with AF the speed and the accuracy at which it can lock focus is also important. What your friend was referring to was probably an Ultrasonic Motor (USM) focussing lens. The better Canon lenses use this. I think Nikon has a version, Sigma definitely does.
Rich
 
Joe, I merely meant that a good lens is one which does what you want, not one which has all sorts of capabilities you're not utilising. If you want the nocturnal light, a certain bokeh, a certain plane of focus, well it matters not if it's a £100 manual lens or a £2000 silent-something-technology 5kg tele-zoom. That's all. I was going to suggest that a lens needed to adjust it's elements to accurately focus but I realised that focus was about what you were trying to do with it. Focus doe snot always behave in the way it should if one is to go by the thousands of comments on lenses and samples out there on the web.
 
I wonder if it takes any of the existing Olympus 4/3 glass? If so then the purchaser has a shed load of lenses to choose from as well as the Leica kit lens.

PS somemore 4/3 kit.
 
Cool. It seems to be either automatic. Or manual. With knobs! And dials! Can't see what the viewfinder's like though.

Except it does look silly with that zoom on it. Now if Leica made a 4/3 prime 14mm...
 
guybat,

With knobs! And dials!
Click to expand...
I know! It almost looks like a real camera. I'd be tempted if I were starting from scratch.

(I'm still hoping that the Nikon FM3D isn't going to remain vapourware.)

nikon-fm3d.jpg


Joe
 
I liked the look of the epson rangefinder which you actually had to 'wind on' to take the next shot haha.

But for 2k it was apparently not very good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top