Optically a modern (Canon etc) lens on a MILc will yield stunning results, yet despite the talk touted by manufacturers about how short flange instances and wide throats would result in smaller and lighter lenses, instances of *significant* size and weight advantages are rare.
testmyspeed omegle th belt
Canon has thankfully made a couple of steps in the right direction by offering 600mm F11 and 800mm F11 lenses as alternatives to the gigantic and hugely expensive L versions, and also has the lightweight 85mm macro. I'd like to see a lot more of these lightweight lenses.
Why e.g. produce F2.8 macro lenses, when hardly anyone shoots macro at full aperture? For most purposes (including stacking) people will be shooting macro at F5.6 or smaller apertures, so it would be good to see a stabilised 180mm F5.6 macro. Likewise it would be great to have a light and compact close-focusing 300mm F5.6.
testmyspeed omegle th belt
Canon has thankfully made a couple of steps in the right direction by offering 600mm F11 and 800mm F11 lenses as alternatives to the gigantic and hugely expensive L versions, and also has the lightweight 85mm macro. I'd like to see a lot more of these lightweight lenses.
Why e.g. produce F2.8 macro lenses, when hardly anyone shoots macro at full aperture? For most purposes (including stacking) people will be shooting macro at F5.6 or smaller apertures, so it would be good to see a stabilised 180mm F5.6 macro. Likewise it would be great to have a light and compact close-focusing 300mm F5.6.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
