On May 18, 2005, at 3:42 PM, frank theriault wrote:
You're right I didn't express my thoughts clearly, which I thought I
address in my second post. You know Godfry you can be quiet annoying
and right now I personally I don't care if I confused you or not, or if
you're just being obnoxious.
I was just making a bit of light-hearted banter! I didn't mean to start a flame-war.
I know. And I was replying in kind.
I simply didn't understand what you were trying to say, Peter. Why is it that I'm obnoxious because I'm trying to understand? Even your clarification wasn't clear. On the third try your opinion and the supporting info as to why was made clear.
But, I also see what Godfrey's saying. He seems to feel that sharpness is paramount, and so he doesn't mind giving up that extra stop or two, and that extra 15mm at the long end.
I don't think the F35-70 is the sharpest lens ever made and, like most of the Pentax lenses I've got, needs to be stopped down one-two stops to reach its peak. However, I do like its rendering qualities, which are more important to me than just sharpness and contrast, and I also like the fact that it is very small, very light, focuses quickly and close.
I think the FA28-105/3.2-4.5 is a better performer and more useful focal length range overall, that's why it's on the camera more often now. I occasionally miss the close focusing of the 35-70, however, which is why I haven't sold it off yet.
Vivitar Series One lenses in that era were always given high marks by virtually everyone that tested them, so it's no surprise to me that it might be a better resolving lens. 'What does its OOF rendering look like?' is what I'd be interested to hear.
Now, if I hear another word out of either one of you, you'll ~both~ be sent up to bed with no supper! <vbg>
Mum's the word. Um. I'm going out to dinner this evening... ;-)
Godfrey
