My lens is solid. The SMCP FA 20-35mm f/4 AL. You probably have a 28mm around, what's the big difference of 4 degrees? That much money? I'd get as wide as I can. Within reason. That FA* does kick butt, no doubt. But mine is also a 58mm, which I have plenty for if I want to use a filter. Cheaper to buy too. I don't know the crap about build quality or where it came from or care, is it just because it's a heavy tank it's 'good' build, it's still plastic right? Here build quality come down to simply is it metal or plastic? Nothing sloppy with mine, and it isn't a feather weight either. Anyhow, what am I yapping on about, I like my lens, I guess, defending her honour? :-) The FA* I would have bought if the fix wasn't in on the one I have, now I see the cheaper price.
Here I speak of two great lenses, and even say I would have bought.....FA*, but I'm gonna get some bitching coming my way about metal vs. plastic, I can see it now. Hehe. Same rules as before, first on my list is cranky gets the reply and then I'm out and something about using my thumb in some way. Maybe not though, it's not a big issue really, so perhaps nothing well come of it but instead my comments in this paragraph? ;-) If so, be adult, bite your tongues, hit delete fast before you can get to the reply button.! :-) Love all of you except 2. <g> Brad! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shaun Canning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 12:36 AM Subject: RE: Wideangle Dilemmas > I'm not sure how all these lenses stack up either Scott, but I know that the > FA* is pretty good (as indeed are the others). I have got rid of most of my > 52mm filters, as I now use a predominantly 77mm set. The 77mm sound like > they can be used on the FA*, but this is not the sole reason for purchasing > this lens. Mainly, I am interested in outright performance. If it doesn't > perform up to my expectations, I will look at something else. However, all > the indications are that this is a cracker of a lens. > > Cheers > > Shaun Canning > Archaeology Department > La Trobe University, > Bundoora, VIC, 3086, > Australia. > > Ph: 0414-967 644 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Nelson [mailto:senelson@;interchange.ubc.ca] > Sent: Thursday, 14 November 2002 03:54 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Wideangle Dilemmas > > Shaun, > > You might want to consider looking for a used Pentax K 24/2.8 or A > 24/2.8. I have the former, and it's quite good and quite small. I > can't say how it stacks up against the FA* 24mm, but it take 52mm > filters in case you already have some that size. > > -Scott > > > On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 14:07, Shaun Canning wrote: > > Thanks Bruce. I am truly torn on this. I know the Tokina's are all pretty > > good lenses as I have three other ATX-Pro series lenses, and am generally > > very happy with them. I also know from my research that the FA*24mm is > going > > to be a brilliant lens. I am still not convinced on the Tokina by any > means, > > and may still go with the FA*. The difference in price between the FA* and > > the Tokina averages about $150.00 USD. That more that pays for the extra 2 > > or 3 filters I would carry (circ.pol, Grad ND, and an 81a probably). The > > question is whether I want to cart around duplicate filters or not. >
