Well, I once did an informal test with 3.5/35-105 SMC-A, 4.0/28-70 F AL and 1.7/50 SMC-M - all set at 50 mm. The best was - can you guess - the old 35-105, runner up with a small margin 50 and 28-70 was third. The differences - on slide film, viewed with a good quality loupe - we quite small, the 4.0/28-70 is a very good lens, for a zoom. I like zooms because they are less fussy - less changing of lenses. And I seriously doubt that your digicam has a 35-105mm f/1.8-2.6 lens. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen
-----Alkuper�inen viesti----- L�hett�j�: Mike Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> P�iv�: 31. lokakuuta 2001 13:51 Aihe: Re: Only using my prime lenses - I promise >I've been arguing for years in favor of primes, basically because I think >people who use ONLY zooms or who ASSUME zooms are inherently better can >often benefit from having their eyes opened. Shooting with a prime for a >while is a great way for people to move the quality of their shooting up a >notch or two. > >The general advantage of primes is that they're smaller, lighter, faster, >less fussy (fewer operations prior to shooting, generally), and have higher >overall image quality (generally, these days, that means less flare, and not >much else). > >These points are nearly moot with digital. My current digicam only weighs a >few ounces, and it's got a lens that's considerably smaller and lighter than >a Leica 50mm Summicron, for instance, and it's a 35-105mm f/1.8-2.6. (My >other two cameras, the Pentaxes, both have 50mm lenses on them most of the >time.) <snip> >--Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
