Pixalo Photography Community - View Single Post

**Dabhand16** · 09-08-2006, 17:31

I always thought that describing the 'zoom range' was standard for all lens makers. However, it woul be useful to also state the magnification range as compared to a standard lens with a normal outlook, that is zero magnification.

You are right to say that whereas 'we' would look at the focal length to ascertain the strength of a lens, and probably not even register the 'zoom range', compacts are marketed the other way round.

Whilst we are on the subject, how do you rate the 70-300? I would prefer, in an ideal situation, f2.8 as the maximum apature, (although my 18-70 kit lens is f3.5-f4.5), and the new 18-135 is closer to that, and I've just posted some thoughts on lenses on the forum announcing this lens. There is also a 70-300 f4.5-f5.6 VR for £399 comming soon.

I'm going to wait for the prices to settle before making any decisions.

09-08-2006, 17:31	#2 (permalink)
Dabhand16 Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Dunstable Bedfordshire UK Posts: 9,785	Re: Rant Time. I always thought that describing the 'zoom range' was standard for all lens makers. However, it woul be useful to also state the magnification range as compared to a standard lens with a normal outlook, that is zero magnification. You are right to say that whereas 'we' would look at the focal length to ascertain the strength of a lens, and probably not even register the 'zoom range', compacts are marketed the other way round. Whilst we are on the subject, how do you rate the 70-300? I would prefer, in an ideal situation, f2.8 as the maximum apature, (although my 18-70 kit lens is f3.5-f4.5), and the new 18-135 is closer to that, and I've just posted some thoughts on lenses on the forum announcing this lens. There is also a 70-300 f4.5-f5.6 VR for £399 comming soon. I'm going to wait for the prices to settle before making any decisions. __________________ Graham