can be measured in a few millimeters. The difference in size is primarily bragging rights.
I don't know, I could have put the M 40mm f2.8 on one of them but the 50 1.7 us closer in size to the
43ltd. I kind of liked the "negative" version the MX was of the *ist-D or vice versa. (It's not so important how
it looks but how good the pictures are however).
Cotty wrote:
On 13/1/05, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
Just because Cotty asked...
Quick and dirty
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/mx-m50_ist-D-fa43.html
Thanks Pete - I would be even more interested in seeing the *ist Ds next to the MX.
I'm sorry buddy, but that pancake lens on that *ist D looks awful.
;-)
Cheers, Cotty
___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
--P.J. O'Rourke
