Cough, cough! The big boys, not so much. I've mounted Nikon lenses from the
late '60s/early '70s on my D3 and they work spectacularly. Of course you have
to, ah, manualize them (sorry, Chris, couldn't resist), but that's not a big
deal. (But, true, you can't go the other way anymore.) Personally, I think it's
more cost efficient to spring for the good stuff up front then sit back for a
while. I bought my D3 a long time ago in digital years. And I'll probably get
another year out of it before I go to the D4, assuming the D4 is all it's
cracked up to be.
(Caveat: This is easy to say when the camera system pays for itself. If it
doesn't, you've got other considerations. But I still think it's much easier to
sit with something for a while and ignore all the latest/greatest unless you
need it, and who really does?) Shoot, AG, you're still using the E-1, and
effectively so. That's bang for the buck.
--Bob
On Jan 6, 2012, at 4:40 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> The old adage about lenses
> lasting years and years is bogus. The manufactures figured out how to
> keep changing lens mounts, or adding some new feature (distance, IS)
> which obsolete the lenses. Of course, just like lemings, we buy the
> new lenses with almost every new body.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|