Probably because some marketing spec called for it even though it
appears to be near worthless. I suspect it also says something about
the accuracy of autofocus. Short lens, great depth of field and not
much difference for the camera to detect between points A and B on the dial.
Chuck Norcutt
James R wrote:
> I agree. But why is the scale there on the new design - because it
> wouldn't look like a proper lens without one?
>
>
> On 25 Apr 2008, at 15:27, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
>> Use an older manual focus lens instead. Costs less too.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>> James R wrote:
>>> Looking at the Pentax 35mm Macro on www.theonlinephotographer.com (a
>>> couple of posts down now) the focusing scale seems so small as to be
>>> pointless. There's only a turn of a few degrees between infinity and
>>> 0.3m. It'll probably 'open up' a little at macro distances, but even
>>> then I doubt the depth of field markings will be of any use. Yes,
>>> most
>>> people use autofocus but I don't see why new lenses have to be
>>> designed this way. The only benefit I can see would be faster
>>> autofocus.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==============================================
>>> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> ==============================================
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ==============================================
>> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>> ==============================================
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|