|
|||||||
|
yea, I guess all those journalists in Iraq and Afghanistan should be using polaroids. |
|
| 06-02-2012, 08:36 AM | |
|
|
|
Not to mention it gives me the opportunity to compare two similar lenses and give advice on a forum as to the value of each. According to your logic, I should take my 645AF with 22mp digital back with me everywhere, right? It takes the best pictures. Wait, no it doesn't. I should take my RZ67, since it takes even BETTER pictures. Never mind the cost and weight.
Last edited by Troublestylist; 06-02-2012 at 12:43 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
||
|
|
|
|
See, this is what happens when people don't understand something (or are trying to be comical) add a bunch of incorrect and misleading posts, confusing an otherwise simple concept by creating a self-sustaining series of divergent comments which get further and further from the original point.
|
||
|
I guess you aced that class. |
|
|
If you'd like to stay on topic, you can either agree with me that the 35/2 is a better buy for most users, or give us some input on why you think the Rokinon is preferable. Or do you think everyone should kick down for L glass?? (It sounds like you think all the reporters in war zones are using L glass, right?) |
|
|
1. a better focus ring 2. better build quality 3. way sharper @ f1.4 than the canon is @ f4 4. sharper than a bunch of L series glass 5. look up the MTF charts or use the-digital-picture.com comparison tool if you don't believe me 6. Lets in over 2x more light wide open, and is very sharp wide open, unlike the 35mm f/2 7. more aperture blades, so better bokeh The only reason to take the canon over this is: 1. you cannot afford the samyang 2. you need autofocus and auto shutter control 3. you want a lens that looks cheaper so that when you get mugged you save ~$50
|
|
|
But if the 35/2 is that blurry at f/4, then it's a garbage lens that needs to be retired....or you got a bad copy. And Google doesn't support your theory. The 35/2 review says:
That said, my point still stands. "Most people" prefer the ability to shoot with AE and AF than "build quality". That's a nebulous subjective trait that usually equates to "It weighs more". Considering how many people consider a DSLR to be too heavy, but a 4/3 camera "just perfect", weight is not to be dismissed as important. And no, even a mugger wouldn't be smart enough to think a Rokinon is worth stealing, but a Canon lens isn't.
|
||
|
The Rokinon is a great lens, and the $350 price is awesome. But its got a limited audience that is basically videographers and people that have been shooting DSLR's for a while and are willing to chance the manual focus aspect for IQ. For the vast majority of users, they won't notice a difference and the 35mm f/2 will actually allow them to take pictures. The stuff about theft is silly...if you're worried about it, insurance for your camera gear is cheap |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Amazon - Nikon 35mm f/1.8G with free Tiffen 52mm UV Protection Filter | thomasdqy | Hot Deals | 4 | 04-27-2012 02:38 AM |
| Excellent deals on Canon lenses and more at Calumet Photo w/ coupon (50mm f/1.4 $319 FS) | 575rider | Hot Deals | 75 | 01-29-2012 11:22 AM |
| $506.07 shipped: Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 Leica DG Summilux Aspherical Lens for Micro 4/3 System lens for micro four thirds cameras via J&R at Amazon (alternative to 20mm f/ 1.7 lens) | goldchocobo | Hot Deals | 13 | 12-26-2011 01:11 PM |
| Sigma 85mm 1.4 for Canon, Nikon $869 | fromthehip | Hot Deals | 7 | 12-22-2011 03:01 PM |
| Nikon Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 Lens $239 - *IN-STOCK* @ Hunts | ex0dus | Hot Deals | 38 | 05-05-2011 06:15 PM |