This is hooey. Photodo is a worthless metric imo. Reducing the performance of a lens to a one unit single valued metric is ridiculous.
I also compared the A50/1.4 against the FA50/1.4, as well as the F50/1.7 and A50/1.7. Both pairs responded identically, 1.7 to 1.7 ... 1.4 to 1.4, and the differences were also 100% consistent when compared 1.7 to 1.4. These lenses are optically identical in their respective max apertures. The differences are solely the mount design and lens unit variations. Hmm. 500mm f/1.4? That one hunk of glass you got there... ! ;-) Godfrey On Jun 28, 2006, at 4:20 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: > Yes, I am. Photodo seem to think so. Nothing's ever the same after > 5-10 > years. Things change, right - glas, polishing, coating, the people > involved, > competion, prices etc., etc. > So how good is the M-1.4/50 1.4. There are loads of those at > eekybay at the > moment, very few FA's, a few Takumar/Super Takumar and ZERO > K-1.4/50mm and > ZERO F-1.4/50mm > > BTW, I jsut posted a FA 1.4/500 shot, comparable to the shots I > made with > the 3 Limited's: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/176951745/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
