Originally posted by pres589 Not nearly enough.
Sounds like "Too many notes" from Amadeus.
---------- Post added 12-23-20 at 10:53 AM ----------
Originally posted by someasiancameraguy Macro shots, astro shots, anything requiring shallow DOF or better. Zooms have their place when flexibility is wanted, but there are times where I would pay for the portability and IQ of one good normal lens. Most days I leave the house with the K-1 or MX/MZ-3 with the 43mm, (28mm aps-c equiv) and I'd like the option of getting a similar setup in aps-c.
Macro shots require smooth out of focus areas, which most macro lenses suck at, but they don't require narrow DoF, unless you plan to for some unfathomable reason decide to take lots of images and stack them. Macro shots usually need as much DoF as you can squeeze out of the lens.
You leave the house with a 43 and that's it? Lord have mercy. The shots you are missing simply boggles the mind. Do you own a * quality zoom?
I went through 10 pages of your posts and found one image. You must not leave the house much. The first thing I look at in this kind of discussion is, "does this guy produce compelling images that would justify me listening to his opinion?" Just saying, bad info about macros, no 43mm images posted.....hmmmm.
I have always noted that low light images are rarely good. It leaves me thinking, maybe people are thinking the lack of contrast and definition in their low light images is a function of the lens used, as opposed to the physical limitations of low light images.
The 31 ltd. is stellar, I honestly think anyone who need 28 type image is unlikely to do better. I've seen ton of comparison, Zeiss, Sigma Art whatever. I you want that type of image, you won't lose with the 31, but will it overcome the disadvantages of low light images in general? No I won't. I'd be happy to hear someone say, "I'm happy with my 31, I might like a 28 as well." That comment is strangely missing from the conversation. After all, wanting a 28 assumes he 31 isn't good enough to do the job.... what do 31 ltd. owners think?
After all, we have people saying you don't need a zoom, zoom when you're feet. The saying we have the 31 we need a 28. You can zoom with your feet as a reason to avoid buying a zom, but you can't zoom with your feet to make up for 3mm on a prime. The inconsistencies are endless.
I have my Sigma 24 macro 2.8 and it fills in really well, because my DFA 28-105 doesn't do 24mm. That will do anything a 28 would do... with a bit of cropping.
Last edited by normhead; 12-23-2020 at 09:32 AM.