Oooh, bad comparison, of course the FA135 will come out on top. The
K135 f2.5. is a different beast altogether.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I have the FA135; I haven't noticed anything specific in terms of
blooming problems, using it with the DS. Can you post a couple of
example photos? I'm curious to know what you are seeing.
I did some casual comparison tests, comparing the FA135/2.8 against
the Takumar K-bayonet 135/2.5 ... see
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/135cmp/ . At that time, I also took
shots for comparison against the Pentax A70-210/4 Macro set to 135mm.
It was the clear winner on sharpness and lack of flare against either
of those.
I'd be interested to know how your K135/2.5 compares.
Godfrey
On May 16, 2005, at 10:56 PM, Marco Alpert wrote:
I have no idea why. It's only the FA 135. None of the other FA lenses
I have (50 1.4, 35 2, 77 Limited) exhibit anything like that severe a
problem.
-Marco
On May 16, 2005, at 10:47 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
That's surprising. I'd have thought the newer glass might have been
superior in that respect. Some of those K lenses are still hard to
beat ;-))
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Marco Alpert
[...] it's also pretty clear that it is much less inclined to
blooming
in high-contrast situations (a problem I've consistently had with the
FA 135).
-Marco
--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx
