Hi, Dave. >> Does anyone have an opinion of the 50f2.8 F macro? I noticed >> from Boz's page that it looks to have the same optics as the >> FA. I think the "A" is the one with the reputation for being >> extremely sharp--how does the "F" compare?
The F 50/2.8 Macro and the FA 50/2.8 Macro appear to be optically identical to each other (and both to be quite different from the A 50/2.8 Macro). The F 50/2.8 Macro is an extremely sharp lens. However, I have found it annoying to use (focusing manually). I usually found the A 50/2.8 Macro a nicer lens to use, sacrificing a little sharpness for much better qualities in ~every~ other respect (except for autofocusing, I guess - <g>). >> I just made an impulse by of the "F" and should be handling >> it by Saturday. Should've asked first and then bought? Nah, >> no fun that way! No fun. Join the many of us that jump at an interesting lens and then ask the PDML what we think about it (often while still waiting for it to come in the mail) - <g>. >> Any opinions welcomed. > The FA was the sharpest lense I owned, I think. Probably the only > sharper Pentax that I've had experience with is the 200 macro. Is that the A* or the FA*, Tom? I would say that the A* 200/4 Macro might be just a tad sharper than the F 50/2.8 Macro, but it's a bit of an "apples and oranges" comparison because of the different focal lengths. I would also rate the A 100/2.8 Macro (easily my overall favorite - and most used - macro lens) to be essentially equal to the F 50/2.8 in sharpness (and much more satisfying to use for manual focus). Fred
