I have both of these lenses. I have not done a formal comparison, but can
offer some observations:
-the 24mm FA /2.0 is very large.
-the 24mm /2.8 is a normal size lens.
-the FA /2.0 has a much faster autofocus.
-the /2.8 is a bit smoother to manually focus
-the FA /2.0 is easier to focus due to the extra stop of speed
My sense is that the FA is a bit less prone to flare, but, again, I have not
done a formal comparison.
Once I got the older K /2.8 I was ready to sell the FA* /2.0. But then I
bought the MZ-S, and the newer lens seems to belong on that body . . . so
for now I will hold onto both.
Stan
> From: "Brent Hutto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:19:36 -0500
> Subject: Any Advantage to SMC 24/2.8 over SMC-FA* 24/2?
>
>...[snip]...
>
> KEH sells an "Excellent" SMC 24/2.8 for $265 but an "Excellent"
> SMC-FA* 24/2 can be had for $286 (when they have the it in stock,
> which isn't every day). For $31 more it sure would seem that the
> newer, faster, fancier lens is a better deal even if I don't have an
> auto-focus camera body. Other than a slight issue of bulk and
> weight is there any way in which a circa 1978 f/2.8 wide-angle
> prime would be superior to a circa 1998 f/2 prime? It just seems like
> in addition to the extra stop of speed (not a huge deal) the SMC-FA*
> would have more modern coatings and an aspherical element and
> should have the optical edge over anything being built for the same
> purpose in the 1970's.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
