On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Steffen Zahn <[email protected]> wrote: > I think this discussion so far abstracts to much from the image quality > of both lenses when used wide open. I have the FA 50/1.4 and below F2.0 > it is very soft and lacks details, not to mention the color fringing on > high contrast transition areas in the image. You need to go to F2.4 to > have good sharpness in the center, and if you need sharpness to the > border, you have to use F2.8 or F3.5. > > I don't have the 40mm, but if I read test results it looks like the 40mm > delivers a good resolution wide open. >
While the 40 wide open is better than the 50 wide open, the 50 is at least as good as the 40 at equivalent apertures. The 50 wide open also makes for some great portraits, the softness works well. Personally, I'd get the 50/1.4. The 40 is a great lens, but it's somewhat of a specialty item (it's all about the size). Optically its good, but there are better options (if you want a 40, the Voigtlander Ultron 40/2 is faster, sharper, better built and not that much larger. No AF though) -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
