From: "David Jenkinson" <jenkinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 23:31:20 +0100
...Can somebody explain this to me in non baffling
terms?
=============
No. %^)
A technical whiz explained it all for me a couple of years ago. Made sense
at the time. I've forgotten almost everything he wrote.
Pop Photo's lens tests used to show these kinds of variances - I don't
recall whether their current abbreviated results do.
I can measure the variances in some of my Canon lenses when mounted on my
T70 bodies, which have very responsive meters. Older cds meters like those
on my OM-1 and Canon FTbn don't seem to pick up the variances readily.
In real world photos, I see no differences even with slow film like
Kodachrome.
Regarding the fixed- vs. variable-aperture zoom debate, I don't buy the
claims that fixed-aperture zooms/varifocals are necessarily better in
performance. However, the fact that the manufacturer took the extra trouble
to design it as such often indicates it's a premium lens. But that premium
performance may result from other factors such as apochromatic design and
low dispersion elements. And variable-aperture zooms can be made smaller,
which many of us prefer.
-----------
Lex Jenkins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Budda-budda-budda!!!" - Sgt. Rock
======================================================================
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|