John Munro wrote:
Was/is yours an FA*24, or just an FA24?
Godfrey prefers an FA over an FA*, for some reason...
Do you?
keith whaley
===========
The plate on the side of my lens states,
"SMC
PENTAX-FA*
1:2 24mm
-IF&AL-"
I've never heard of an FA24 versus an FA*24; so, I checked Dimitrov's
site and couldn't find a listing for an FA24 there, only an FA*24 is
listed.
Without naming names, because that's not what this discussion is all
about, it happens that some people are not always sufficiently precise
when stating what lens did what.
Either they're shortening up the name, or forgot to add the *, or
something like that. No doubt unintentional, but it happens.
To answer your question, I have only used the FA*24 f/2 and the A24
f/2.8 - I prefer the FA*24 over the A24. The only aspect of the A24 I
like over the FA*24 is the color of the lens' body - black vs. silver,
respectively. The size and weight issue doesn't affect me as it does
Godfrey - I suspect I'm older (and maybe stronger) than Godfrey, for I
come from an era when it was sacreligious to use (or mention)
"miniature", "lightweight" 35mm cameras among professional
photographers. It is beneficial to me having the extra f/stop speed and
autofocus abilities of the FA*24, plus I think my FA*24 has superior
optical qualities than my A24 - most of what I shoot is b&w film and the
b&w tonal print qualities of the FA lens are not as harsh and contrasty
as the A24 lens - i.e., the FA lens is more Leica-like - more sharpness
with a pleasing, even, transitional blending of the gray scale. I
realize this is VERY subjective, but it is my honest opinion and why I
prefer the FA*24.
Hope you have a good day, Keith.
- JM
Thanks for your evaluation. I do appreciate it.
keith
