alan_m
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Phillip Reeve wrote:
alan_m wrote:
@Phillip - Did you see these from my new FDn 24/2.8?
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/969329/528#11373765
And the following page for a couple of night shots. From first impressions it seems to be great, sharp with good colour, saturation and contrast, like most FDn primes. Roughly the size & weight of the 35/2, feels more solid than the 28/2.8. I haven't done corner tests or anything (yet, though I may not bother!). The 24/2 is thought to be better, but for around 1/5 the price this seems like amazing value - I like cheap good lenses! 
I did and liked them, that was why i asked about the 28
Finally, the compliment I was fishing for. ;-) But seriously, I thought that either it was a typo on your part, or you thought that I was posting about the 28/2.8, or... anyway my mistake!
I have the FDn 28/2.8 as well, and despite it being among the cheapest FDn's (along with the 50/1.8), not particularly well regarded and feeling a bit light-weight (more plastic than metal inside, I assume?) it's very good. Flare can be funky (blue blobs), prone to purple fringing, but aside from that it's very sharp and contrasty. I'm not the best to ask about subtle rendering qualities or wide open corner sharpness, aside from good central sharpness I'm not too bothered (well, that's my excuse for buying only cheap/sharp lenses!). These are from last year, edited from JPG, not RAW, old NEX-5:
Old Chubb lock by specularist, on Flickr
Bullock by specularist, on Flickr
Graffiti on rust by specularist, on Flickr
But was it you who said they didn't particularly like the FDn 35/2? If so, there may be no hope for you with the 28mm or 24mm. ;-)
Alan
|
