> From: Andre Langevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Hi - I'm Bill and I have made scads of beautiful (and even > > well-selling!) images using my lowly 20mm f4.5 "Bow-Wow Takumar" > How can this be? > >Bill > > Because the lens has good contrast and your eye good vision. > > Andre
Bill, I don't get it either. Nobody wanted to buy any of those perfectly exposed pictures of brick walls I took on fine-grained film with my 20/4.5, probably because they were turned off by the "double form of distortion and loss of sharpness in the corners of the image". <vbg!> But seriously... While the test target shots from this lens show that it has some genuine problems at wider apertures, I've put a certain amount of mileage on mine and have not been disappointed in the way I've been disappointed by, say, my 14/3.5 Sigma or 70-210/4 AF Nikkor (which are simply "not sharp" wide open). My major gripe about the 20/4.5 in actual use is that it is damned hard to focus in poor light, at least on a Spotmatic. Also, every 20mm nikkor I've tested is better, which leads me to hope that more recent Pentax 20mm lenses are also better. While I'd like to find a "better" and yet still affordable 20mm Pentax lens to take on vacation, it looks like the 20/4.5 SMC-T and a screw-bayonet adapter are going to England next year because my get-a-20 drive has been interrupted by a sudden unexpected need for new tie rods and alignment. OTOH, I'd join the support group. I've got guilt over ignoring my M50/2 for years in preference to the A50/1.2 which I don't recall EVER shooting wide open (good thing, too, from what I hear). DJE
