I wonder what enlargements you have done to compare your 35mm. K35/3.5 would be nice but a little too dark and no A but I do not exclude it-some people believe it is great performer and not so expensive Alek
Użytkownik Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >I\'ve played with the K 35 f3.5 I have one each of the M 35 f2.0 and f2.8 lenses >unfortunately I\'ve never used any of the A lenses in this focal length. My >experience >with the A lenses is that they generally feel cheaper. I haven\'t been able >to discern >any reel difference in results. > >At 06:50 PM 3/13/2003 +0100, you wrote: >>Hi, >>Have you tried any other 35mm from Pentax?Any comments.. >>Alek >>Użytkownik Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >> >I\\\'ve never handled the 35mm A version but in general you can assume that >> >optically >> >it will be at least the equal of the M and somewhat inferior in build and >> >focus feel. >> >There are exceptions but not many. >> > >> >At 01:28 PM 3/13/2003 +0100, you wrote: >> >>Dear All, >> >>I own M35/2.8 but think about buying A version to have spot/matrix on my >> >>PZ1 and more flexibility on Super A. Could you write any opinions/official >> >>tests of the lens?How does it performe in comparisno with K 35mm lenses >> >>and FA 35/2.0 one? Is it of the same quality like M version? Or maybe >> >>A35/2.0 is much better and comparable with new FA? >> >>Please send me some suggestions....and comparisons >> >>Thank you in advance. >> >>Alek >> > >> >Outside of a dog, a book is man\\\'s best friend. >> > Inside of a dog, it\\\'s too dark to read. --Groucho Marx >> > > >Outside of a dog, a book is man\'s best friend. > Inside of a dog, it\'s too dark to read. --Groucho Marx >
