It shouldn't ... I was just wondering aloud and asking a couple of questions (note the question marks), which, thus far, have gone unanswered.
Stan Halpin wrote: > > So, how does that change Mark's comments in any way? It is > nice to know that we can, hopefully, anticipate a quality > lens, not one that panders to the bargain hunters. > > Stan > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > Umm, isn't the DA 14/2.8 designed for digital cameras? > > Won't it be useless on standard frame 35mm cameras? > > > > Mark Roberts wrote: > > > > > >>In other words, this is going to be a top quality prime ultra-wide for > >>discriminating photographers rather than a cheap ultra-wide solution for > >>DSLR owners on a budget. > > > > > >
