I never said the single coated is a half stop faster. I`m just going by what I saw, both cameras pointed at the same subject, standing side by side. You are correct that it could be meter fluctuations, I know my meter is dead on, and I bet Shel`s was too. My 135/2.3 was a K mount multi coated version. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California "Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film."
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Langevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 6:40 PM Subject: Re: comments wanted on the vivitar S1 135mm 2.3 > >I say it might be a little > >faster than rated because I was shooting side by side with Shel, we > >were both using LXae, 100 speed film, I was using the 135/2.3, > >he was using the renowned 85/1.8 (wish I had one), it was a dark > >and gloomy day and we were both wide open. > > Shooting EXACTLY the same scene? Both LX meters with same > calibration (checked on a grey card)? Margin of error is probably > close to half a stop unless both consitions were assured. > > Steve, I think it should be investigated a bit more... That the > single coated lens is half a stop faster than the multi-coated > version is enough to make me doubt about this. > > Maybe somebody with both lenses and the SMC 135/2.5 could do a > decisive test one day. > > Andre > > >I asked him what his > >shutter speed was and it was 1/60, same as mine. > > Bob Monaghan kind of hinted that the 200/3 and 135/2.3 are > >probably faster than rated, by today`s standards. > > > >Steve Larson > > -- >
