I agree that you can't simply tick off the features. But I thought you
had made the opposite mistake of discarding the K10D based solely on
price. But your comments about the Pentax lenses make it clear that
you've investigated. I'm sure there are some who will buy a 4/3 camera
based on the 7-14 but it won't be me. I'm somewhat like Moose who seems
to have principally a telephoto view of the world.
For years the only two lenses I had for my OM-1 was a 50/1.4 and the
200/4. The 200/4 lived on the camera most of the time despite shooting
slow speed K64 almost exclusively. I've been shooting more wide angle
in the last couple of years but I rarely go less than 24mm (full frame)
and I can't go less than 17mm since that's the shortest I have. But the
17mm rarely comes out so I can't see myself shooting at a 14mm
equivalent and especially at the price of that lens no matter how good
it is. Having been formally trained as a people shooter in formal
occasions I never go below 28mm in those venues. In fact, when I bought
my 28-80 lens I specifically shied away from a 24-xx just so I couldn't
accidentally get that wide and have seriously distorted folks at the
edge of the field. The few times that I do desire something really wide
what I really want is a panorama and I can usually get that quickly
enough with 2 or 3 shots and stitch them together. If I was still
shooting film it might be different.
Chuck Norcutt
Sandy Harris wrote:
> On 10/22/07, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> You should do a closer comparison on feature set before deciding that
>> what's competitive should be based on price range vs. actual features.
>
> It has to be at least partly based on price range.
>
> Features are important too, but a device that needs a serious design
> effort cannot be evaluated just by ticking off features. You have to look
> at the trade-offs made in the design and how they match your needs.
>
>> Even at its low price the Pentax is weather sealed. It has full support
>> for older, manual focus lenses (including mechanical auto diaphragms)
>> and supports IS with these old lenses. The IS needs to know the focal
>> length of the lens so the firmware allows you to input the focal length
>> for older lenses. Something that Oly could do but has elected not to.
>
> Those are all good reasons to consider the K10D a better choice for
> many people, including me, than the comparably priced Olympus
> E510. Or to buy a Pentax rather than E3 and put the savings into
> glass.
>
>> I don't think there's an analog to the 7-14 (14-28) ...
>
> That lens is, for some, a reason to go Olympus,or at least 4/3.
> The 14-35 F2 will likely be another. No-one else I know of has
> anything comparable.
>
> For me, the compact 21 and 70 L lenses are reasons to go
> with Pentax. I don't know of comparable 4/3 lenses.
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|