I don't have the best memory . . . wasn't one of the purported
benefits of 4/3 smaller lenses?
ScottGee1
On 3/10/07, Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Funniest response I saw on this lens by Mike Johnston:
>
> "I mean, really. A 3-inch square, 18-ounce lens to cover a sensor
> that's 13.5 x 18mm? To put you in context, if this lens covered
> 4x5 ,and was proportional, it would be as big as a watermelon.
>
> A big watermelon."
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|