Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] not entirely OT: the recurrent dilemma
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Mon Feb 12 12:50:48 2007

On 2/12/07 3:37 PM, "Philippe Orlent" <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> typed:

> I read different stories about the 16-35 and the 17-40. Seems that
> it's a piece to piece comparison thing.
> Looks like unstable production. Maybe I'd better go for 2 primes in
> this range.
> Thanks for the info,
> Philippe
> 
> 
Plenty of people might tell you that the whole reason for owning a DSLR is
that a DSLR is a life support system for a zoom super wide angle lens.
Zoom wide angles come along late in life just ten or 15 years ago and they
took over in a swoop. Many photographers in many walks of life (out standing
in their field) find themselves never taking it off their camera.

If you had a APS-C or smaller ( EOS Digital Rebel series or 20D and 30D SLR
cameras. ) format Canon you'd be in line to use their terrific 10-22mm which
gives you in effect an 16-35mm in 35mm format, for
$674.95 at B&H. focuses to 9.5 inches


A telephoto zoom is of course useful as is a normal zoon but a wide or super
wide zoom makes the area you are shooting in front of you plastic.
Playdoe.
That's the only way to describe it.

Mark Rabiner
New York, NY
40?47'59.79"N   
73?57'32.37"W

markrabiner.com




Replies: Reply from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] not entirely OT: the recurrent dilemma)
In reply to: Message from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] not entirely OT: the recurrent dilemma)