Boz' site lists 45mm for the FA35 and 43.5mm for the FA20... that's about 0.05 inches difference, no? Unless you count the hood in the FA35. And, the FA20 has a huge 67mm filter size, compared to 49mm of all the other lenses we've discussed.
The M20 is 30mm long: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/ultra-wide/M20f4.html which is actually shorter than the 31mm of the M50/2. But the FA20 doesn't sound bad. Do you have it? Would you bring it to the PDML meet in SF next week? Cheers, j On 9/30/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am not sure how large the M50/2 is, but B&H lists the FA20/2.8 as > 1.7" long and 2.7" diameter. That's an inch shorter than the FA35/2, > which is small enough for me. ;-) > > Godfrey > > On Sep 30, 2005, at 6:56 AM, Juan Buhler wrote: > > > Yes, except that the only reason to buy one for me would be how > > compact it is.It is really small, about the size of an M50/2 or > > smaller. > > > > And I agree, $450 is too expensive... > > > > j > > > > On 9/30/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> KEH has one listed at present for $450 in "Like New Minus" condition. > >> At that kind of money, I'd spend the extra $50 and buy a brand new > >> FA20/2.8 or FA20-35/4 from B&H. > >> > >> Godfrey > >> > >> On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:51 AM, Juan Buhler wrote: > >> > >> > >>> The other day I had the chance to use Gianfranco's M20/4 on the > >>> istD, > >>> and liked it a lot. It's small and handles well, and it seems like I > >>> could put up with the slowness. I do have the FA16/45 which is also > >>> f4, but shooting with a compact rig has advantages sometimes. > >>> > >>> How hard is this lens to find? Anyone has comments on it? (not > >>> much on > >>> it on Stan's page) > >>> > >>> Anyone has one for sale? :) > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Juan Buhler > > http://www.jbuhler.com > > photoblog at http://photoblog.jbuhler.com > > > > > > -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com photoblog at http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
