Interesting read by Thom Hogan

Started Feb 14, 2014 | Discussions thread
DFPanno Veteran Member • Posts: 5,494
You are putting words in my mouth……..

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):

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  Not really fair to use it to question my overall contention - that some real portion of these catalogs are outdated.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow