On Nov 29, 2008, at 12:04 PM, Martin Sammtleben wrote:

> At 11:21 -0800, 29/11/08, Doug Fairchild wrote:
>> Or better yet, Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 with one of the new Zeiss
>> lenses.
>
> The Sony looks like a real bargain, but if you don't want to
> switch, Zeiss has started making lenses with Canon mount:
> <http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b58b9/Contents-Frame/
> a86526b2a93cad45c12574bb0051e515>
>
> There are also adapters available to mount Nikon lenses on Canon
> bodies:
> <http://www.16-9.net/>

Yeah. I know. It's not really a matter of switching. I like my Canon
stuff. And I don't think I want to try to fudge it with an adaptor.
I've never seen one that didn't introduce something I didn't want to
mess with, or remove something I really wanted, or just plain got in
my way. Maybe they are better now, but I'm already convinced by
experience.

And I can't find one of those lenses for Canon, anyhow. I don't think
they are actually making them yet. I plodded through the Zeiss site
until I found a pair of Zeiss Distagons for Canon mount, and they
were both noted as "out of stock". Out of stock at the manufacturer.
Hmph. Not that I was looking for one of those.

I couldn't find the one I want, the 24-70mm F2.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Vario
Sonnar for Canon anywhere. I seems to be available for the Sony,
possibly because Sony and Zeiss have been partnering for awhile, and
it was actually built alongside the Sony SLRs, but I have searched
and not found hide nor hair of it for Canon. I don't think it exists
yet. Zeiss got left in the lurch by some Asian company that licensed
the Contax brand and then quit making it. Now they can't do anything
with the Contax they invented and was ripped off by Nikon right after
the war. Funny. Nikon even appropriated their lens trademark, "Ikon".
I remember at that time, Nikon was called "Nikkor" in Germany, for
that reason. So the Germans may be a little chary of getting too
deep into Asian relationships. Just an observation, probably not
valid, but it made me think.

Anyway, the reviews and image samples (on the dpreview.com Sony A300
review ) are so outstanding my mouth is watering as if these items
were made out of fried chicken and I had been on a vegetarian diet
for 90 days. 60 years of waiting for a small format camera that could
take a picture that even came close to 8 x 10 and I want it.

It sounds like a very expensive setup, but it's less than the
similarly endowed Canon by a couple of hairs, so that camera and
that lens are in the "maybe I could find a way to afford it" price
range for me, unlike some of the other big guns that start in at
around 25 to 35K dollars and go straight up from there. And it is not
full of gee-gaws I didn't want anyway.

Sorry about all the OT everybody. Just don't read it if you aren't
interested. I'll run down like a Dollar watch soon, if you don't wind
me up again.

Doug


--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/GoLive/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/GoLive/