On Mon 2001-06-25 (18:12), Raimo Korhonen wrote:
> I have both lenses and I also did a little comparison. The lenses have
> quite similar quality, the 24-90 perhaps having a little bit more
> contrast and sharpness. The difference is not big but the new lens is
> much lighter (due to more plastics) and much more versatile. The 24-90
> is my new favourite, expensive but worth it.
Why this one and not e.g. the 28-105?
And a different, general question:
Why do newer lenses offer inferior aperture values? I thought that new
materials and forumlas could permit for brighter lenses?
In fact I was told that the maximum aperture does not depend on the
quality or groups of the lenses, but only on geometry (front lense,
length)?
I do not get this point, since the 35/105 is labeled 'f/3.5' for the full
range.
The new lenses are
FA 24-90/3.5-4.5
FA 28-105/3.2-4.5
Regards
Martin
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
