On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 10:48 AM, paul stenquist<[email protected]> wrote: > I'm glad you find the 35/2 superior to the 31/1.9 limited. ...
I didn't say that, Paul. I said I didn't find it 2x to 3x the quality as implied by 3x the price. I also found that it flared in various circumstances and was difficult to fit with a decent lens hood. > I find the 16-50/2.8 is the equal of both the 35/2 and the FA 50/1.4, Sigh. I found the lens to be a fine performer ... better or worse than those two I couldn't say as I never actually tested it in comparison. I didn't like working with it ... too big, heavy and clumsy to work. But then, you like Chrysler products. -- Godfrey www.gdgphoto.com www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto www.twitter.com/godfreydigiorgi -- 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.
