I've found the M35/2.8 to be a very nice sharp lens when stopped down
one or two stops. It's not bad wide open either but as with most lens
sharpness improves stopped down. In addition it is extremely compact and
can be found at relatively low cost. I wouldn't forgo purchasing the 2.8
while waiting to get a 2.0 since the 2.0 is usually much more expensive.
At 04:37 PM 12/28/2002 -0800, you wrote:
Hey Folks,
I've been toying with the idea of adding a 35mm prime
to the collection. While I liked the results from the
35/3.5, it's a lens I had a hard time getting to like.
I think it was the dim viewfinder, especially when
compared to the 50/1.7 I often use.
So, I'm considering getting one of the 35/2.8's. I
seem to recall the A35/2.8 being poorly regarded. So
I've been looking at the M35/2.8 but Boz's website
indicates that they share the same optical formula. I
don't seem to recall hearing anything negative about
the M version and there are few reports on Stan's
site.
I tend to shoot at wider apertures so performance at
f2.8, 3.5, and 4 are important to me. Is the M35/3.8 a
good one? Or am I better off looking for a M or A
35/2.0?
TIA,
Mark
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
