Interesting read by Thom Hogan

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
captura
Forum ProPosts: 12,819Gear list
Like?
Re: re: You are putting words in my mouth…
In reply to jpr2, 5 months ago

jpr2 wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

jpr2 wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

These are, for the most part, fine lenses. I am privileged to own a couple of them myself. The problem is that lens technology has moved forward and some of these are now rather long in the tooth (35 and 135). Others are very good but not superlative lenses ( the 28IS?).

as some of your (supposedly high-standard assessment) statements look outright strange to me - taking the EF 135/2L as an example (not my shot, just a random sample from the Net):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kinematic/10771705516/meta/

there doesn't seem to be any reason at all to rubbish the results from this lens on the 36 Mpx (A7r) sensor.

Actually even on 57 Mpx (eqiv. FF) resolution of N7-classic the 135/2L shines bright - "long in the tooth indeed" ?!!. So much so that it is with some trepidation I await Sony's native E-mount version to much it (when it finally arrives, if at all )

I have most certainly not "rubbished" anything.

As good as the 135 is it could be improved.

The fact that it has not been does not indicate that the ability is not there. It indicates that such improvement is not in Canon's best financial interest.

Their interest is in amortizing the design and production of the existing lens cost's as long as possible.

Good, bad, or indifferent; the fact remains that Canon has such a lens now while Sony may not ever produce such a lens.

Incidently the 135 is one of Canon's best lenses - and a bargain to boot. Not really fair to use it to question my overall contention - that some real portion of these catalogs are outdated.

Am I [putting the words] ?? Sure, any lens can be improved, at a cost. BUT... the fact that any particular lens is "old" doesn't preclude it to be a paragon of excellence.

In the case of all 135/2 ever produced, the EF 135L is one of the very best - recently R. Cicala has run a direct comparison of the 135L and the new Zeiss 135/2. The Zeiss is marginally better, at over 2x the price - does it support your argument then? Or mine? Whichever way to look at it the age of 135L has a very little to do with it, if anything at all !!

Because I'm not sure WHY you're saying things you do???

jpr2

Additionally there are two other great affordable lenses from this stable; the EF 100 and the EF85/1.8.

Hogan has ignored a whole other class of shoppers but thy desrve mentioning. Those who will buy an A7 or an A6000 with only one or two of the best native lenses, and that's all. And kep them for years. These are not Pros but hobbyists who appreciate high quality but don't have any need for many lenses.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
YepNew
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow