alex_ryan

to be more specific:

 

I have a 135mm 1:3.5 lens and a 35-135mm 3.5-4.5

 

I also have a 50mm and 28-80 for other shots

What do zoom lens do to print quality? Specifically, would it be

better, if photographing a concert, to use a 35-135 Kiron lens or a

135 fixed canon lens?

I don't really know where to post this, so I guess this is the best

place. What is the word on Russian Leica copies such as the FED?

I have a 50-135mm lens that I would love to make into a 100-270mm

with a teleconvertor, but I was told that they play havoc with

picture quality. Is this true?

Use the A-1! I was at an event over the weekend where I used my A-1 and a friends point and shoot digital. The A-1 was signifigantly better as far as quality was concerned. It is also more fun to use and you don't have to deal with the focus time and the lack of focus resultant from bad AF. If you must get a digital, get an olympus ultra-zoom, these are really very good for a digital point and shoot.

Stick with the a-1 unless prepared to spend a huge amount of money- cameras are not made the same as they used to be, you must buy the "professional" grade cameras now to equte the quality of older cameras that were sold to the public. I use an a-1 that was my dad's, and it takes better pictures than anything that I have seen that does not cost 1000+. Personally, I would only switch if I had the money to buy an EOS-1d Mk.II (8.4 megapixel canon digital), but with lens these run as much as $4000, not within my tiny budget.