> I wonder if you have a bad sample. I wouldn't call anything I've > seen from mine embarrassingly soft or smeary.
If I recall correctly (a slight possibility - <g>), I think that sample variance in the M 85/2 has been suggested before here on the PDML as an explanation for conflicting opinions. I don't know... I've had the chance to use two specimens of this lens before, and my experience with them was that they were pretty much the same as each other. (Of course, maybe I got a couple of good ones - <g>.) By the way, in the Amateur Photographer review of the M 85/2, their first sample had a "sticking" diaphragm (but only one one body, and not on the other), but its replacement did not (on either body). Now, ~there~ is a significant sample variance - <g>, even if mechanical and not optical. Fred - 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 .
