On Jul 13, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
Rob wrote:
I own a 15/3.5 and a 16/2.8 fisheye and if I were just shooting
digital when I purchased these lenses I'd probably only have
bought the fisheye. Apart from the weight and size differential
I'll bet that either of these two lenses would be as good as if
not better performers than the 14/2.8DA on a digital SLR and both
would be far superior on a film camera.
I have tested the DA 14 against the Zenitar 16 mm fisheye. I
believe I posted the results some months ago. Since then I have
changed my operating system, and now cannot retrieve older e-mails.
IIRC, the Zenitar is actually sharper than the DA 14, at least in
the center. I am not sure about the corners. Anyway, the Zenitar is
a very sharp lens for what it is.
I'll be able to compare that for myself soon as I have a Zenitar-K
16/2.8 in transit to me now. I'm quite interested to see how it
performs.
I don't, however, share your opinion of the 14mm. I did a number of
tests with the DA16-45 vs the DA14, in response to your statement
that the DA16-45 out-performed it, and found otherwise. The DA14 at
the very corners and edges, wide open, is just as blurry as the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] setting is ... but cropped to the same field of view, it is
sharper and the blur at the corners/edges (even full frame) is more
pleasing in the DA14.
Godfrey
