On 9/30/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, I don't own the FA20. I use the FA20-35/4 instead, I have the > FA35/2 too. I might want a 28 or a 20, haven't decided yet.
I will most definitely bring the FA28/2.8, and can also bring the M28/3.5, K30/2.8 and even the K24/3.5 if you want to play with them for the day. j > > Godfrey > > > On Sep 30, 2005, at 7:24 AM, Juan Buhler wrote: > > > Boz' site lists 45mm for the FA35 and 43.5mm for the FA20... that's > > about 0.05 inches difference, no? Unless you count the hood in the > > FA35. And, the FA20 has a huge 67mm filter size, compared to 49mm of > > all the other lenses we've discussed. > > ... > > But the FA20 doesn't sound bad. Do you have it? Would you bring it to > > the PDML meet in SF next week? > > > > On 9/30/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I am not sure how large the M50/2 is, but B&H lists the FA20/2.8 as > >> 1.7" long and 2.7" diameter. That's an inch shorter than the FA35/2, > >> which is small enough for me. ;-) > > -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com photoblog at http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
