If you really want to assess lens performance you should be looking a first-generation images - ie the negative itself (or a slide if you want it to look normal). The quality of the prints may well be limited by the machine used to make them. I don't think comparing 4x6 prints is a good way to judge lens performance - unless that's the only way you ever plan to use the photographs. Which is possible - most photographs never get printed larger than that anyhow. I guess for those applications a zoom is, indeed, good enough. Pete .... I got 4x6 prints and examined them under a Peak 10x Loupe. This is an effective 42x enlargement of the negative. To my amazement, I could detect no real difference in sharpness between the primes and the zoom. The 50mm prime seemed a tiny bit sharper than the zoom set to 50mm and the zoom set to 35mm seemed a tiny bit sharper than the 35mm prime! Note that the zoom had a slight disadvantage, as its max aperture is f/4.0 and so was harder to focus than the primes. .... Anybody care to comment.
