Yes, particularly wide open: focusing manually with the 35mm lens is
a snap due to its excellent contrast and faster speed. The
differences become small as you stop down past f/4.5-5.6. The 20-35
is incredibly good for its price and size, but it cannot compete at
the limit with a top notch prime, and the FA35/2 AL is extremely good.
On the other hand, the FA35/2 cannot go to 20-28mm field of view.
Sometimes that is essential.
(I haven't done critical performance tests, but I was out shooting
with the A24/2.8 yesterday. I think the FA20-35 is a little more
contrasty wide-open at 24mm than the A24/2.8 ... not sure, but I find
it easier to focus manually despite being a stop slower. Other aspect
of the performance I'll need to do more rigorous testing to comment on.)
Godfrey
On Oct 27, 2005, at 10:57 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Just to be clear - are you saying that the 35/2 is the superior
performer?
At all apertures?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
My experience mirrors yours, Paul. I can easily see the difference
between an FA35/2 and the FA20-35/4, and both are very good
performers.
