alternative to my k30 f2.8, and k35 3.5 in autofocus?

[Ron Kruger]

No, David, that's a Road Runner.
And the W80 was much more pragmatic than trying to take my K20D under water.

[Pacerr]

. . . that 300 f4 or the 200 f2.8   would beat the 60-250,   and the optio w80  ?  

Absolutely not if the 200 or 300 was mounted on the camera when the shot needed a 135mm FOV right this instant . . .

Tcom even made mention of being "out of position" because of FL on one of his bird shots.

[Frogfish]

I would like to know which lens Tcom thinks gives him the best IQ for large prints: the 200 the 60-250 or the 300? That's where it really counts; that and to a lesser degree magazine reproductions.
I can get pretty good 8 1/2 X 11 prints from my Optio W80, and they look great posted here.

Definitely the 300 over the 60-250 as I have done those tests. I always thought the 200 was ultra-sharp but reading a thread the other day there were differing opinions on this.

[davidhampshire]

i wondered how you took that underwater shot ,  ron;    don't tell anyone,  but i never learned how to swim.   

[davidhampshire]

frogfish,   then  i think i need to get the 43 ltd,   the 60-250,   the 300,   and one of those optio w whatevers...

[spyglass]

I think it would be pretty hard to argue that a lens made for a variable focal length (zoom) would be better that a lens made for a specific focal length (Prime). Design and build advantage the Prime.

In regards to professionals using primes, I would think that a professional would uses the best tool they had to accomplish the task at hand. It just goes to reason that if you are in the game that you would acquire a full assortment of specialized tools. (kind of like the home mechanic verses the actual mechanic. The home mechanic has a reasonable layout of tools and learns to make do. The actual mechanic has several variation, each with subtle differences, of each tool.)

In regards to general use of zoom lenses, I think the quality for the  majority of lenses produced today exceed the user. (yes you can keep building fighter jets to pull more G's but once you exceed the physical limitation of a human pilot it probably doesn't matter anymore). If users spend as much time honing their skills as they do dreaming, chasing, and buying lenses it would have more end result impact.

25% equipment - 70% user - 5% just dumb luck

Spyglass 

[Pacerr]

Here's an example:  I've got the Tammy SP 180 (63B) and the SP 80-200 (30A) and have done comparisons in the 160 - 200mm range many times. I LOVE that 180 prime for many reasons, but to tell ya the truth, unless I keep diligent track of the image file numbers I often can't reliably tell 'em apart 10 minutes later in the computer.

They're almost identical in rendering at 180mm but more importantly, there's just too many other functional variables in actual practice to reliably distinguish one shot from the other.

Which one is "best" on any given Sunday afternoon depends on everything BUT the optical potential. The real question is whether 80-200mm versatility outweighs the lighter weight and handling convenience. I've never yet had to make an either/or choice and not wished I'd chosen the other lens at least once at some point in the day.

. . . 5% just dumb luck. 

or as the man said, "F 8 an' be there."

[Ron Kruger]

I bought the Optio as an inexpensive way to investigate underwater photography in fresh water streams and rivers. It works, so I've since upgraded. I don't use it any more.
My point of posting it is to show you don't need much to post to the internet.

[Ron Kruger]

Woooooooooo. You can hide out at my place for a while, Spy.

I think it would be pretty hard to argue that a lens made for a variable focal length (zoom) would be better that a lens made for a specific focal length (Prime). Design and build advantage the Prime.

In regards to professionals using primes, I would think that a professional would uses the best tool they had to accomplish the task at hand. It just goes to reason that if you are in the game that you would acquire a full assortment of specialized tools. (kind of like the home mechanic verses the actual mechanic. The home mechanic has a reasonable layout of tools and learns to make do. The actual mechanic has several variation, each with subtle differences, of each tool.)

In regards to general use of zoom lenses, I think the quality for the  majority of lenses produced today exceed the user. (yes you can keep building fighter jets to pull more G's but once you exceed the physical limitation of a human pilot it probably doesn't matter anymore). If users spend as much time honing their skills as they do dreaming, chasing, and buying lenses it would have more end result impact.

25% equipment - 70% user - 5% just dumb luck

Spyglass 

[Pacerr]

There's one other characteristic of zooms that makes a big difference, IME.

The person that has learned to consider a zoom as a specific set of focal lengths and FOVs instantly available on camera has a much different take on the matter than the guy who simply plays the zoom like a trombone slide hopin' to find a solution. Playin by ear as it were.

Those with little experience with a zoom or that haven't given 'em serious thought (hard core prime users?) often haven't made that transition and overlook one of the prime advantages (pun intended) of the zoom lens.

. . . you don't need much to post to the internet.

That WAS a magazine cover from the W80?

[Frogfish]

I think it would be pretty hard to argue that a lens made for a variable focal length (zoom) would be better that a lens made for a specific focal length (Prime). Design and build advantage the Prime.

I would say that 99% of the time that would be correct, if we were talking about the same level of glass. However I have just picked up a Contax Zeiss 35-70/3.4 that according to Zeiss themselves is sharper at any FL than their corresponding prime. So far tests seem to confirm that !

[davidhampshire]

i think what spy said,   gotta stop all the lens obsession now and take some photos ....   but i know though the lens ocd will come back eventually.....     

dave