>>> I've never met a macro lens I didn't like. >> I'd say that's basically true for me, too [snip] Except maybe for >> the F 50/2.8 Macro, which is optically ~superb~, but which >> manually focuses like a piece of junk.)
> Good point. I'll change that to "I've never met a MF macro lens I > didn't like, nor an AF macro lens I didn't want to break in > frustration." :) Har! Yes, but part of the frustration is that, optically, the lens is so good (a tad better than the A 50/2.8, which I prefer, despite the 2:1 vs 1:1 mag limit). I don't know if the FA version (optically the same as the F) is a little better at manual focusing (might be the same, but couldn't get any worse, methinks...). As a generality, I do understand that AF lenses may not always be at their best for manual focusing, since that's not their "design mission". However, a macro lens really should give more than "lip service" to manual focus ability, I would think. Fred
