</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (chrisl @ May 14 2003, 09:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> How come all you guys are suggesting older lenses?
Cost or desired effect? Surely the newer styled but dated
modern lenses are either sharper or have more contrast I'd think. Anyway, just curious. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
It's because we're all old, and still broke from buying the lenses when they were new
Honestly, when the negative is 8x10" the difference in resolution betwen an old triple convertible and a brand new aspheric supermulticoated lens is - barely noticeable. Something in between - like my 300mm Xenar, 1960's, single coated - will be all but indistinguishable from a new lens.
Many of us seem to leave the new lenses to those who can write them off against taxes or something, and then we buy the old lenses off them when something new comes out. Keeps everybody happy!