There is no magical size/weight advantage

Started Mar 5, 2014 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,920Gear list
Re: There is no magical size/weight advantage
In reply to IVN, Mar 5, 2014

I agree with what you wrote, maybe a 70-300 for the 1 series will be just a bit smaller than the same lens in FX format.

But that's not what most of us are interested in. We're speaking about equivalent focal lenghts.

A 70-300 for 1 series will be much smaller than a 190 - 810, which is the equivalent in FX format.

That's what is interesting. See the 30-110 : it's the smallest lens I know of which gives a 70-300 mm equivalent in FX format.

You know all that.

I'm not in birding, so I'm not really interested in 70-300 for my V1 (albeit I guess it would be fun to use).

On the contrary, I'm very interested in very small allround zooms, like the Pany 12-32, which gives a 24-64 equivalent focal reach in FX format.

I know some people here can't understand why some could be interested in such small lenses. The answer is simple: I use my V1 for travel. I'm looking for the best image quality and convenience in the smallest package.

Give me a V3, a very good an small 12-xx (even if it's a bit slow, say 3.5-5.6). And I couldn't be happier. I have the 18.5, the 30-110, and the FT1. What else would I need?

-- hide signature --
 andrbar's gear list:andrbar's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7100 Nikon Coolpix P7800 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D7100 Nikon D3300 +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow