Comments on: Digital SLRs bring lens quandary

Changes that came with higher-end digicam models may have brought more diversity than some buyers bargained for.
Photos: SLR cameras for the digital age

[anothered]

Why do we think things are "forever"

We should try to enjoy and use techology for what it is. Sure, to keep the price of D-SLRs (NOT "35mm" D-SLR) down, it was probably and is cheaper for the manufacturer to come up with "specialized" wide lenses or zooms to offset the magnification factor. This why you see these digital only lenses like the Canon's EF-S or Nikon's DX only in the lower ranges where it more needed. In fact a camera like Canon's 5D with it full frame sensor can actually show a lens' weakness in edge sharpness if it's less than professional quality. I seen many people hang onto old lenses waiting for a D-SLR to come along. Sure all those Minolta Maxxum lenses you paid so much for years ago but you didn't want to spend for a new Canon Digital Rebel or Nikon N50 system which would have given you newer lens technology and smaller lighter lenses for a similar price of a Maxxum 7D body. New is new, if it works with you old stuff great but don't knock it if it doesn't.

[anothered]

Why do we think things are "forever"

We should try to enjoy and use techology for what it is. Sure, to keep the price of D-SLRs (NOT "35mm" D-SLR) down, it was probably and is cheaper for the manufacturer to come up with "specialized" wide lenses or zooms to offset the magnification factor. This why you see these digital only lenses like the Canon's EF-S or Nikon's DX only in the lower ranges where it more needed. In fact a camera like Canon's 5D with it full frame sensor can actually show a lens' weakness in edge sharpness if it's less than professional quality. I seen many people hang onto old lenses waiting for a D-SLR to come along. Sure all those Minolta Maxxum lenses you paid so much for years ago but you didn't want to spend for a new Canon Digital Rebel or Nikon N50 system which would have given you newer lens technology and smaller lighter lenses for a similar price of a Maxxum 7D body. New is new, if it works with your old stuff great but don't knock it if it doesn't.

[anothered]

whoops and sorry...

I thought the other two didn't go through when I received a "page not found". My apologies for the multiple comments.

[optika_hawaii]

I've used both Canon 1Ds series full-frame and Nikon D3 and while they are awesome cameras...if we are talking cost-to-value benefit, both of these lines are a rip-off. Why? Because they do not cost that much more to produce, period. Full-frame is great, but APS is actually much better. Better quality wide-angle, much better quality telephoto. Full-frame has comparatively weaker color, light fall-off, eats up memory...very little real-world benefit other than being able to crop in at 500 percent with a magnifying glass and say "ah ha!!! The full-frame advantage!!!" Seriously speaking, I went down to Ritz Camera and played with the Sony Alpha 700 with the exquisitely detailed vertical grip attached. Fired it up and boom! Beautiful pictures. The feel of it in your hands is amazing, and the brightness and color through the viewfinder...beautiful. And speed? Shutter speed is like lightning. With two good lenses, I would absolutely question a real-world need for full-frame. I've been much happier since I sold my 1Ds Mark II. I've decided that I have the chops to take great photos no matter what size sensor I'm using. APS is sharp, fast, reliable, and full of detail.