[ A week behind, but no one answered this directly: ] J. C. O'Connel wrote: > I find the old 90mm to be just as sharp as all the rest of > the 67 lenses. Is the 165 as good as your other lenses in > terms of sharpness and contrast? I would be shocked if it > isnt.
I personally don't have either but I have done a bit of research: Various sources that I've found indicate that the 165 f4.0 LS lens is a bit softer than the 165 f/2.8 lens. Sharp, not Razor sharp. On the other hand, that may not be all that bad for portraiture. I have not seen any comments which rate the 90 f/2.8 LS as inferior to or better than the 90 f/2.8. Bolo -- Josef T. Burger - 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 .
