pookipichu
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Stefan, I applaud your efforts and your company's efforts to bring quality lenses to the market. That having been said, I have used T/S lenses from both Canon and Nikon. From personal experience, the Nikon T/S is probably one of the sharpest lenses made, flare resistant, CA resistant, great color rendition, and no vignetting. They have managed to make an extremely competent mass produced product. I would be interested in seeing comparison between your similarly spec'ed lens and the difference in performance and resolving power.
While the Canon 24 3.5L is suboptimal, the 90mm TS is quite good and the Nikkor 85 is superb. A Zeiss wide angle TS would have little competition, but your mid tele must overcome the law of diminishing returns. If it is only marginally better than an already stellar product, it seems like it would attract more technicians or pixel peepers more than actual working professionals given multiple fold price increase. I'm just wondering the actual viability of such a business model in an age when the queen of boutique lenses, Leica is fighting bankruptcy. Despite the handfull of proponents on this board, the vast un-tapped market of emerging photographers are buying lenses for under $2000. If your company only cares about these elite few 35mm users, who have not yet jumped to the P45 phaseback, or use a 35mm in conjunction with their digital back, then I am not your target audience so ignore me.
I would not want the quality of your lenses compromised, nor is price necessarily the issue, but if you want to convince consumers like me, show us that the lenses are MUCH better. We need comparisons, we need to know that other options are so inferior, your $4000 lens is the sensible option, because that's the only time I buy a lens more expensive than a grand.
Anyhoo it's just a thought...
|
.this was after he saw a food shot from a D1S mark II that I demoed.