Winsor Crosby wrote:
>I think Oly is not alone. Most lens development seems to be going to
>zooms and fast, long primes.......I have not looked at Canon's site, but if
>you
>look at the lens site for Nikon Japan you will find that the MTFs for
>the recent zoom lenses are better than the MTF of the primes, even the
>ones with outstanding reputations.
>
I think what is happening here is that, while some folks, like me, have
been happily playing with our old MF lenses, major strides in lens
design have been happening over in AF land*.
In the world of old MF lenses, it's pretty exciting when a lens includes
an ED/LD element. The newer designs are using multiple "special"
elements. The Tamron 28-300 Di I've raved about has 15 elements, the
same as Oly's first zoom, the 75-150. However, 3 of those elements are
made of "special" glass of 3 types and 3 are aspherical.
The result of these current materials and methods is strikingly
improvment over most older zooms. Remember Gary's lens test statement
about the Tamron SP 80-200 ED? "80mm focal length performance rivals the
best of prime lenses." Well, that is true of more top line lenses over
more of their focal range than back then.
So if the market likes zooms, and you can make them essentially as good
as primes, why make primes? Especially when you are imaging through
anti-aliasing filters that limit how much of the resolution you can
actually use.
Sure, the best primes will continue to be as good as, and often better
than, the best zooms, although not by much, and will continue to rule
the speed roost, at least for now. But the days where one could
automatically assume a prime was better than a zoom without asking which
prime and which zoom are looong gone.
Moose
*Not that the same things couldn't be made in MF, but that's not where
the market is.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|