As I've mentioned (probably on more than one occassion!), I'm very reluctant to fork out thousands for modern so-called "digital" lenses, if I can pick up an equally well performing old manual lens for a tenth of the price.
I should point out that for my use, AF is of little value (particularly considering how poor the AF is on the Phase One cameras compared to what I'm used to with the Canon 1D Mk IV). Perhaps if a new camera from Phase One massively improves the AF functionality, then I might consider the AF lenses being worthwhile, but until then, I'm happy to stick with the old lenses IF the optical quality is up to scratch.
Hi Gerald,
That's exactly my position as well. I had Mamiya 645 as a film platform since the early '90s, so I had some excellent manual lenses like the 35 N, 55 N, 80/1.9 C and 200/2.8 APO, with my range extended by 2x N TC and the best P6/Kiev lenses on adapters (30mm fisheye, 300/4 Sonnar). Went to digital/AF on a budget 2 years ago (645AFD + Kodak DCS 645M back) and got only one AF lens for it, the 55-110/4.5 zoom. So where I need speed and convenience (digital + AF + zoom), like a family event, I'm covered adequately with that one AF lens. For everything else, it's manual focus primes all the way.
I have since then added a couple more - 110/2.8 N and 24/4 ULD fisheye. Excellent and incredible, respectively.
So far I've picked up a 150 3.5, 80/1.9, 50 shift, 200/2.8 and 300/2.8. I'm holding off on anything wider as I am pretty certain I'll be going down the HCam/Canon TS-E route for that. Need to fill in the 120 gap with a macro, and I'd love to have the 120 TS, but apart from that, I'm almost done for focal lengths above 50.
My next targets are the 120/4 macro, 300/2.8, and a 45/2.8 because sometimes the 35 is too slow and the 55 is not wide enough. Then I think I'll be just about done. Not particularly interested in shift applications so I think I'll skip the 50/4. Am curious about the 145/4 soft focus though, just for the fun of it. There are three 500mm lenses to choose from, but in that regime I think I'm better served by an APO telescope.
When I look at the entire AF lens lineup, there really is nothing that leaps out at me saying "you want me, don't you?!".
- Especially because none of them is faster in aperture than their manual focus counterparts, and several (80, 200/210, 300) are actually slower.
- I don't need fast leaf shutter flash synch.
- Whatever improvements there may be to corner performance, in say the 45/2.8 D, don't matter to my small-crop current DB.
- And a big, big, BIG turn-off is not being able to mount the AF lenses on a 35mm DSLR (my Zoerk adapter won't fit the wider AF flange) - and not being able to control their apertures even if I could mount them. Whereas the manual lenses work great on my 5DII.
Ray