Quote:
Originally Posted by sisforsurfing
Jon, don't know where you're getting the weird distortion stuff? Maybe the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm? Otherwise their 14mm and 85mm are optically right there with the Canon Ls at 1/5 the cost. (if you're good enough to focus the 85)
They're just lenses. Some are deservedly priced, some are overpriced, and some are outright bargains. Take almost any 135mm since the 70s. They are all sharp and all have good bokeh. Some can be found for like $40, often less.
I say it's worth it to play with some mid-range teles and fast 50s (the pentax 50/1.4s are super cheap.) The wides are cool too but not so much on a crop body.
But really, if I had a crop Sony body I'd get the new 35mm f1.8 and 85mm f2.8 which are sure to be really good, are cheap and have autofocus.
|
Chris -
I meant that the bottom barrel dirt cheap soviet union stuff is hipster. Not all of it is particularly good - is it acceptable? Sure. Maybe? Some of the Jupiter examples I've seen are terribly soft - others are sharp. There's so many different lenses.
My point about distortion was regarding the 14mm 2.8's coming out. There is also another prime with the issue, I forget which. Its correctable in PTLens but honestly I prefer to not have to PP every image with a certain lens. Also, forget about using it for video. People like to dismiss it as "not noticeable" - here are some examples.
Ouch
Yeah they're cheap, but 3 - 4 $50 - $200 lenses could buy you a single nice lens. I am just suggesting that Elliott be careful with selection.