To me, twice the size and twice the weight is irrelevant. Perhaps that's a function of my having shot Pentax 6x7 for quite a while and my predilection for equipment that has enough heft to be capable of anchoring itself. I have a very compact Leica, and sometimes I enjoy shooting with that -- ditto an MX and 40/2.8 -- but for the most part the size of the equipment is somewhat irrelevant when I'm concerned about getting good results. And, as I said, in most cases I prefer a heftier rig. Paul
> The FA 20 f2.8, compared to the Sigma 20mm f1.8. The Sigma is twice the size > and more than twice the weight. Guys, take a deep breath and relax. I was just expressing my pleasure at the size and weight of the lens. I didn't say that small was good or necessary, or that large was bad. I didn't even say that size and weight were relevant to anything. Joe
