> You, and Candace, make my point. You are professionals, at least part time,
> and need specialized equipment.
However, you and Chuck are implying (to varying degrees) that our
choices in specialized equipment is based on old technology or old
think. The implication is that sensor technology trumps lens
technology. This is a "Ken Rockwell" kind of thinking.
> But would you actually spend this kind of money on a lens? Have you aver
> bought a fast AF zoom?
Adjusted for inflation, I have spent this kind of money on a couple of
quality zooms. The 14-54 was pretty close (we'll see what the street
prices settle in at after a while, same as what happened with the
14-54 and 12-60). The Tokina AT-X 35-70/2.8 (non-AF because OMs
weren't AF) was most certainly a premium priced lens in the day.
> Sticky Guns Moose
Try washing after you eat. :)
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|