Sat 05-Jan-13 07:36 PM | edited Sat 05-Jan-13 07:43 PM by Ray B
>So true, but the reality is that fast glass will NEVER go out >of style, because in this case you would still rather have a >2.8 vs 4 and be able to shoot at 6400 instead of 12800. Shoot, >I'm waiting for 25600 to shoot like 4000 and then walk into >the gymnasium and shoot 1/1000th on ISO 200. LOL It's all >good. How blessed we are to be able to debate the >"issues" of improved performance
We've been so spoilt in the digital era. I remember as a boy of 12 shooting Ilford HP5 (400 ISO or as it was then 400 ASA) and push processing it in my home darkroom to 800. That was standard stuff in the newspapers back then too. Even with digital each new generation of sensors seems to gain half to a full stop on the high ISO end. So, maybe it's nothing to do with "need" and a lot more to do with "I can get shots that didn't used to be possible".
Even at a pro level I'm not sure I even buy the need for 2.8 zooms anymore. I'm in the camp of 4.0 for zooms and using primes when you need faster.......
Going back again to the "old days" zooms were so awful we all used primes, I love the weight of multiple 1.8 primes over a 2.8 zoom any day