I guess both are good enough for most purposes... DA*55 @f/1.4: http://www.thrane.name/page3/page8/files/page8-1012-full.html DA*55 @f/1.7: http://www.thrane.name/page3/page8/files/page8-1019-full.html http://www.thrane.name/page3/page8/files/page8-1006-full.html FA50 @f/1.4: http://www.thrane.name/page3/page8/files/page8-1048-full.html FA50 @f/1.7: http://www.thrane.name/page3/page8/files/page8-1044-full.html
DagT http://www.thrane.name Den 23. nov. 2010 kl. 20.20 skrev DagT: > Very subjective, but I think the DA*55 is more like the old A*85. Something > about the softness out of focus. > > DagT > http://www.thrane.name > > > > Den 23. nov. 2010 kl. 20.15 skrev Collin Brendemuehl: > >> Anyone using the 55? >> How do they compare optically? >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Collin Brendemuehl >> http://kerygmainstitute.org >> >> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" >> -- Jim Elliott > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
