Why did you fix the screen for the M40 test? ;-) That also shows how good the FA 50 is. Just to point out, the DA 40 was a pretty good lens. I guess it wasn't the same design?
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Collin Brendemuehl <[email protected]> wrote: > This time it's te FA50/1.4 vs the Mamiya (Tomioka?) 55/1.4 v the old M40/2.8 > All shot with the K-x. > > http://www.brendemuehl.net/images/lenstest/ > > The images are in pairs. > #1 of each is the full frame, > reduced in size for your downloading convenience. > > #2 of each is a 100% section of the frame. > > Pair #1 is the Mamiya. > Pair #2 is the FA > Pair #3 is the M40/2.8 > > I am surprised how glaring the Mamiya is. Sad. But the edges are sharp. > It would be a good lens for a less-glaring situation. > And even as so-so as the M40 is, it still showed up for the fight. > IT is quite pleasing with digital data and > is maybe a better digital lens than it is a film lens. > > Sincerely, > > Collin Brendemuehl > > "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" > -- Jim Elliott > > > > > > -- > 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. > -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
