Hallo
and interesting comparision, but the flare is bad on the Conon lenses.
Would be a Pentax 50mm better?
It would be interesting to have comparsion to a Pentax 50mm lens.
regards
Rüdiger
Von: Evan Hanson
>Over at photo.net they have a comparison of the EF 50 1.8 vs. EF 50 1.4.
>IMHO both exh
From: Anthony Farr
> Another Canonite wrote about the two 50s: "Both are great but in different
> ways."
I tried the 1.8/50 when I thought about switching to 10D or D60, and
all samples I tried (new in shop) were very disappointing at 2/3 out
field performance, and that's on a reduced (not full f
> -Original Message-
> From: Rüdiger Neumann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Hallo
> and interesting comparision, but the flare is bad on the
> Conon lenses.
I wouldn't say it's bad, but it's not as good as SMC.
> Would be a Pentax 50mm better?
> It would be interesting to have comparsion t
Rüdiger Neumann wrote:
Hallo
and interesting comparision, but the flare is bad on the Conon lenses.
Would be a Pentax 50mm better?
This is the worst I ever took out of the Pentax M 50/1.4:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/vdonisa/Scan9a.jpg
http://www3.sympatico.ca/vdonisa/Scan13a.jpg
No filter or hood.
Hallo,
I had only flare problems with my Pentax FA 28-200 (which is a Tamron)
and that will be a surprice with my 1.9/43.
regards
Rüdiger
Von: Caveman
>> and interesting comparision, but the flare is bad on the Conon lenses.
>> Would be a Pentax 50mm better?
>
>This is the worst I ever took out o
5 matches
Mail list logo