> But, and here's the rub.....as one of the answers pointed
> out,*all* zoomlenses, by definition *should* be variable aperture,
> shouldn't they?
When I bought my first zoom, everybody around me said "a lens
shouldn' be a zoom" ...
>To me this means that any lens with a fixed aperture must be a
>compromised design in some way, and also why isn't my 65-200/4 a
>65-200/2.8-4 or something like that.
All lenses, even the primes, are compromises.
I'm not a lens engineer, but I think earlier zooms were costly and
had narrower zoom ranges. It seems that when the engineers give up
features like non-rotating (revolving?) helicoid, fixed aperture,
fixed length, all metal & glass components etc., they have more
freedom in designing zoom lenses.
I'm not sure so I would like to know the correct answer, too.
kazuya matsumoto
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|