Hi, > At one point, I bought an inexpensive Yashica body and mounted a Contax > 50mm f1.4 on it, and shot with it for a few weeks, and really, I could > not tell the difference between it and my SMC-M 50mm f1.4. I know that > the Contax should probably be sharper under strict testing...but so > what? I don't shoot test patterns.
my experience has been that the M 50/1.4 was rather too cold for my tastes and lacked something that I can really only describe as sparkle. Although it was perfectly sharp, beautifully built and easy to use it had this lifeless quality that I didn't like, and it seemed to stand out in this way from the rest of the K, M and A lenses that I had. The CZ 50/1.4 that I now have, on the other hand, has all the warmth etc. that the Pentax M lacked, as well as the sharpness &c. I can certainly tell the difference on K64 slides on the lightbox and projected. I know it's heresy, but on balance I prefer the CZ lenses to the Pentax and the Leitz M lenses; however the CZ lenses are more prone to flare than the SMC lenses. The bodies though aren't as well made as eg the LX or the Leica Ms. --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "I do not go 'Click! Click!'. I go 'click!'" - Henri Cartier-Bresson - 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 .
