OT: lenses (Was: Front Panels - PDP8 and PDP 11

[Marco Gariboldi]

2016-03-11 5:31 GMT+01:00 Zane Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com>:

> Again, Rollei, where the Tessar is on the low-end, Planar is on the
> high-end.  And yes, even SGI had a low-end.  I have two O2’s, one is
> low-end, one is high-end, there the difference is the CPU..
>

Nobody in his right mind would've called a(n originally) US$ 17000~20000
costing O2 'low-end', just because it was *relatively speaking* one of the
_cheaper offerings_ of SGI.  Neither did companies treat it as low-end, as
Discreet, SGO and other big names certified the O2 for turn-key usage, like
as an Effect (later: Spark) compositing turn-key system.  I can assure you,
those didn't have low-end price tags either, at all!



> Are you familiar with colour fringing, such as you get with a Voigtlander
> 15mm f/4.5 lens on a Leica M9?


I'm not a millionaire or an pensioned old man, I haven't owned any Leica
camera bodies.  But I've heard and read rather 'mixed' things about
Cosina-Voigtländer lenses, yes.


I like my 50’s to be 50’s, and my wides to be wide.


Your wallet better be wide, too.  It comes at a considerable premium...



> Besides, you get a higher image quality out of a full frame sensor.


This is entirely subjective, it has nothing to do with the quality of
pictures.  There's also an entire and growing community of µ4/3 users that
will happily disagree... and who didn't have to spend a small fortune
either, to get where they are.



> If I could afford it, I’d be shooting medium format.


You'll get kicked out of most places with such a monstrosity in your hands,
being asked for journalistic credentials, permits and such.  If that's no
problem for you, along with portability, I guess it might work out for
you.  (Especially if money also grows on your back, unless you're doing
this professionally.)



> I have a friend with a Hasselblad H3D, it’s fairly old, but blows away my
> much newer Nikon D800, and his Canon 1Dx.
>

I saw tests that actually showed the contrary.  But I guess the average
Hasselblad chump isn't willing to admit it, after having had to sell his
car in order to be able to afford one.



> Most people will be happy with the 50mm f/1.4G at any aperture.  I’m after
> as close to perfection as I can get.


Can you show some of your examples?  Also, what's the point of buying a
lens with a fairly wide aperture if it's only usable stopped down so much?
(Were you aware of this prior to buying it?)  Most experienced
photographers would even think twice before buying such a lens at all, if
having been aware prior to purchasing it.



> BTW, there is one other Nikkor lens that I’m totally happy with.  That’s
> the 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom.  A truly amazing lens.


Is that a kit lens?


 - MG