This certainly seems true to some degree. Varifocal lenses - zooms which
change focus as focal length changes - can have good performance/price
ratios.
However, one only has to look at the Zuiko 35-80/2.8 to see that you can
have a non-rotating front ring, fixed aperture, all metal/glass
construction and true zooming and yet also top performance.
I think the main thing really achieved by not incorporating such features
is a cost saving to the manufacturer.
Giles
k.matsumoto wrote:
> All lenses, even the primes, are compromises.
>
> I'm not a lens engineer, but I think earlier zooms were costly and
> had narrower zoom ranges. It seems that when the engineers give up
> features like non-rotating (revolving?) helicoid, fixed aperture, fixed
> length, all metal & glass components etc., they have more freedom in
> designing zoom lenses.
>
> I'm not sure so I would like to know the correct answer, too.
< 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 >
|