o hey tyler
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,784
- Reaction score
- 2,727
- Location
- Maine
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
Derrel said:That must be why the Nikon Trinity is the 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200, all f/2.8...because there's no point in going from wide-angle 94 degree angle of view, to short tele, in one lens...
That must be why Canon, and Sigma, and Tamron, and Sony, and of course Nikon, ALL make high-end 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses...because there's no point in owning something so outrageously practical...and a smaller, lighter, less-expensive 24-70mm Canon lens, with an AMAZING .7x macro reproduction capability, and Canon's state of the art Image Stabilizer system, is silly, especially in this era of cameras with decent ISO 6,400 capability...a TOP-quality optical design with an f/4 max aperture is no longer the drawback it was when d-slr's topped out at a clean high ISO value of 250, like with the original $8,000 11 megapixel Canon 1Ds of a decade ago...or even when ISO 500 was the high end...
I personally don't care about convenience factor. And you apparently have not learned what an opinion is.
I never said "No one should buy a 24-70/2.8 ever." I said I have zero interest in that focal range at f/2.8. I'd rather shoot primes. They can make those lenses all they want. No doubt people like yourself and others will buy them.
I won't.