|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2008, 08:26 PM
|
| |
Wow. This is news for me :)
So if the 14/2.8 from other brands have no filter thread, how do they use polarizer, ND filters, etc? Even the cokin filters require an adaptor ring of some sort which screw into the filter thread?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2008, 06:56 PM
|
| |
what do u mean the only 14/2.8 with filter thread? U mean 14mm lenses (from canon, nikon, etc) have no filter thread?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2008, 05:52 PM
|
| |
Thanks guys for the explanations. It is good that u mentioned the Tamron 28-75. I do have this lens and am very pleased with it. I didn't know it is suitable for full frame as well. Good news for me. But I think my lovely DA14 is APS-C only :( :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2008, 06:30 AM
|
| |
Pardon my ignorance...
I understand that with FF you get less sensor noise at high ISO, u get better of everything thing but why would we want this when
1. u will lose the range of using APC-S glass. i mean that expensive 70-200 we buy when on the APC-S body is really a 105-300mm lens on a FF body. On a FF body, that 70-200 is well, a 70-200. Isn't the extra range something?
2. the ultrawide lens like 14mm and 12-24mm (which to me seems to be wide enuf) on a FF body will be well, 14mm and 12-24mm respectively, which would also mean it is necessary to invest in more expensive filters to avoid vignetting issues? Cokin X-Pro series are very expensive. With APC-S body, we can still stick to Z-Pro series for the 12-24 or some people even use the P-series with some minor modifications. Isn't the cost savings worthwhile?
I would welcome the move to FF but at what cost?
|
