----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 10:37 PM
Subject: Re: M lens testimonial
> I've heard (read) over and over that the 40/2.8 is an overpriced mutt, but
> I've never seen any photos attributed to it that make me say "Ick". Anyone
> know how it got such a lousy reputation?
IIRC the 40 is a "tessar" design and therefore not at its best until
stopped down a ways. I bet that if the 40 is shot around f8 or 11 it will
give acceptably sharp pictures. My guess is that some people spent too much
on it and then were disapointed with its performance at 2.8, hence the bad
rep.
Isaac
>
> Dan Scott
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Paul wrote:
>
> >I got some nice shots with the
> >40/2.8 and was quite surprised by the quality of the resulting film.
> >It's probably not quite as sharp as the 35/2, but it's definitely not a
> >bow-wow.
-
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 .
