On 27/07/15 13:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:06:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 26/07/15 22:32, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 20:07:35 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

The biggest problem is that old style lenses aren't very good compared
to modern digital ones. Even something like a four thirds digital will
exceed what an old film SLR and lens can achieve.

??
I'm guessing you're one of those people that believes CDs give a
superior sound compared to vinyl.

I don't believe it, I have tested it and I know it for a fact.

And indeed yes, modern lenses are better than older ones. I've got two
top of the range zooms from 15 years ago, total cost then well over a
thousand. Outperformed by a pair of 150 quid plastic jobbies of today.

I was of course referring to the *prime* lenses of the time.
Anyway, we'll see how well your cheap "plastic jobbies" are working in 30
or 40 years from now...

dont be silly, they will be in a bin buy then along with te mouldy
primes I've still got somewhere.

However you are wrong when you say the film was better than te lenses.
It wasn't. My best and extremely good primne 50mm was (just) better than
even kodachrome 25.

Todays CCDS are now better than that film ever was.


--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.