gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
To comment on the above...
I suppose that it is a matter of perspective. There's always a tension, when it comes to photography gear, between "buy the best at any cost," "you can get very good gear by spending bit less than' any cost' if you approach this rationally," and "I'm cost-constrained and my choice is between the least expensive thing and nothing."
Where you come down along that line matters a lot.
I'm not a big fan of that first orientation — the one where folks throw money at photographic questions, imagining that they always need to get the very most expensive (and big and impressive looking) thing, no matter how much it costs. There are some situations in which buying "the best" regardless of cost makes sense, but one does need to stop and consider in each case whether or not the difference is worth it.
I do understand the third perspective. I remember (many!) years ago when I was a young guy getting started in photography and I could only dream of more expensive, high-end gear. I remember saving for many months to buy my first camera with a single prime lens... and the saving for a long time to get one more lens. Back then I was in that same situation where the choice is between the $149 lens or no lens at all. So for anyone who needs at 27mm f/2.8 lens, cannot afford $399 but can afford the much lower price of the TTArtisan lens... I can understand the appeal. "The bird in the hand," and all that.
However, from my perspective, the $399 price of the Fujifilm lens is already pretty modest as lenses go. And it is a good value, based on my experience with the original and new versions of the lens. Its optical quality is quite good. It AFs well, It is a solid, reliable product. It interfaces seamlessly with my Fujifilm camera.
So, for me, the savings for the lesser lens isn't worth it. I can still buy groceries after buying the Fujifilm version. ;-)
But, as I'm trying to say, YMMV.
Dan
|
