akozak, All perform quite well. The worst performer IMO, was the FA 28/2.8. It has light falloff problems until about f8 - quite noticeable. In trying to trim my kit down a bit, that was the worst of the bunch. Each lens mentioned (24,35,50) are different enough to not compare directly. That set provides reasonable coverage, speed and optical quality.
Bruce Monday, December 2, 2002, 3:32:41 AM, you wrote: aop> Hi Bruce, aop> What about optical performance?Which of 24, 35 and 50 is the best/worst? aop> I own A50/1.7 so it should be roughly similar to FA version. aop> Alek aop> Użytkownik Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >>Ryan, >> >>As one who has owned both the FA 28/2.8 and FA 35/2, I don't think it >>is that important to own both. The 31 splits the focal lengths and is >>reputed to be quite a wonderful lens. It also partially depends on if >>you own or intend to get the 43 limited. The FA 35/2 is not too far >>from the 43 in focal length. The 31 & 43 make a better set. >> >>As for me, I sold my FA 28/2.8. I have the FA *24/2 and the FA 35/2 >>and the FA 50/1.7. That makes a very nice set also. >> >> >>Bruce >> >> >> >>Sunday, December 1, 2002, 9:58:41 PM, you wrote: >> >>RC> Hello to All, >> >>RC> If you had the choice of either the Pentax 31mm f1.8 >>RC> Limited lens or both the FA 28mm f2.8 and FA 35mm f2, >>RC> what would you choose? >>RC> Please only responses from those who know these lenses >>RC> well. >> >>RC> Thanks, >>RC> Ryan >> >>RC> __________________________________________________ >>RC> Do you Yahoo!? >>RC> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. >>RC> http://mailplus.yahoo.com >>
