Hi Stan, I'll comment again, although I've already posted once on this thread. The lens is pretty good, has a warm color balance (compared to 30/2.8 and 35/3.5) and good flare control. It is also slightly longer in actual focal lenght than the 35/3.5 However, I cannot agree that it is "superb", as in my mind that does not leave room for lenses that are obviously (to me, anyway) better (sharper, less falloff, better bokeh), such as the aforementioned 30/2.8 and 35/3.5. I would say the performance is about on par with the FA28-70/4, good, to be sure, but not great.
Thanks, William in Utah 12/30/2002 3:28:57 PM, "Stan Halpin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >A major upgrade is coming soon! Tell me more about this lens (i.e., >something more than P�l is wrong, that it is a superb lens) and I will >include the point-counterpoint. > >Stan >--- >on 12/30/02 3:38 PM, Andre Langevin at [EMAIL PROTECTED] >wrote: > >>> --- Andre Langevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>>>> I seem to recall the A35/2.8 being poorly regarded. >>>>> Mark >>>> >>>> You probably mix this lens with the A28/2.8. The M >>>> or A 35/2.8 >>>> lenses are both superb. >>> >>> No. You can read Pal's comments on this lens at Stan >>> Halpin's website. Also, I was at the house of another >>> PDMLer and he was in agreement with Pal's assessment. >>> >>> Mark >> >> Mark, they are still only two opinions! You have many others right >> here that say that the lens is a very good performer. The problem is >> that Pal's opinion is the only one that went on Stan's site. Note >> that what Pal says is that the lens is soft wide open. Most lenses >> are... >> >> Andre > > >
