Originally posted by Ira I do?
Okay.
(Remember--I'm NOT the one trying to wash myself clean of LBA.)
Does anyone else here notice the correlation between lens cost and LBA satisfaction?
I find my LBA to be more highly sated (albeit temporarily) when I pay too much for something. When I get a bargain, it hardly feels like I bought anything.
Ira, very interesting view. I have thought about that, you know, what we get out of LBA and all. Correlation between lens cost and satisfaction to me is not there. But rarity of the lens may, I suppose. Having a lens that are hard to find seems like it gives you an edge, more or less. Speaking of bargains, I recently bought a M42 Takumar 300/4 for about $150 in Japan. It was a pristine copy, but besides that I was blown way by how good of pictures it takes. I mean it was about to (notice - it wasn't that it did) open up a whole new area of LBA. I know that many of you are crazy about Takumars, and I now clearly see why. I got a couple of them; 17 fisheye, which is a very very cool lens, and 300/4. Maybe it is the IQ/Cost ratio that gives us the willey. After that Tak 300/4 purchase, it certainly left a bad taste in my mouth about FA ltds and all. What a rip off, really.
So may be I should make Tak lenses exempt . . . . .
No, I shouldn't.
Somebody help me please.