Hmm, I often find myself using the FA50 1.4 at between 2.5 and 3.5. Do
you think the 43 would be a significant step up for me?
Don't think so. In fact, I don't think 43 is all that special optically. 31
is biting sharp, and 77 has nice creamy feel and great bokeh. But 43? Well,
I just don't see
h 50mm? (was Re: Pancake SMC-M 40mm 2.8)
>
>
> >Another query which definitely has been asked before (This
> should all
> >be archived somewhere shouldn't it..) which AF 50mm's best
> optically,
> >how much, and roughly how often on Ebay (or where else would
Another query which definitely has been asked before (This should all be
archived somewhere shouldn't it..) which AF 50mm's best optically, how
much,
and roughly how often on Ebay (or where else would I get one..)
If you don't need to shoot faster than f4, I recommend 50/1.4 (too soft near
wide o
Thanks everyone for the input! Just lately I've been somewhat attracted to
the compactness of it. Lots more subtle than a 28-70 2.8 (don't need a
70-200 2.8 to intimidate people). Pity it's not AF..
Another query which definitely has been asked before (This should all be
archived somewhere shouldn
4 matches
Mail list logo
