There is no hole and no foot. And example of hole and foot is when you call the 5D "not a professional" camera but when the Canon site called it exactly that. Remember that?
(Well, you did bring up the 5D thread….so I am allowed to use it)
Anyway I digress.
Put it simply, you made a sweeping comment on older lenses being better built than modern high end DSLR lenses. I link you to a tear down that an example of a modern high end DSLR lens that is built like a tank, it's there in black and white in the article, they actually said "Built like a Tank".
The date and release of this lens alone proves quality lenses are still made today, it doesn't need to reference "old lenses were bad before". It simply proves you were wrong in your sweeping statement that old lenses were built better before and here is one high end DSLR lens that is
"built like a tank".
Sure there are badly made modern lenses (or bad old lenses in any era) but you specifically said High End, and the 35L mk2 is undoubtably a High End 35mm, that's it. No foot, not hole. You made a sweeping statement. I linked to an article to prove you otherwise.
Unless you disagree that the 35L is not high end or you disagree of it's build quality?
Before you quote me, note that I am not saying old lenses were not made well, or am I saying all modern lenses are built like the 35L. I simply disagree with your sweeping comment that older high end DSLR lenses and cameras were made better than they do now.
Because you don't seem to take into account how they were used then, how they are used now, the tech, the features, i mean look at the D850. Are you really sticking to your comment that High End cameras are not made like they used to? Or are you calling the D850 "not high end" ?
https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...n-shows-off-its-weather-and-toughness-testing