Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/03/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In message <199603051517.QAA01245@amoco.saclay.cea.fr>, Laurent SAMINADAYAR <saminad@amoco.saclay.cea.fr> writes >Is the 35 f/2 better than the 35 f/1.4? For the M system; I had to chose between these and I like fast lenses; I read up everything I could find and talked to dealers (I have a dealer I trust not to bs me) and felt on balance that there was a *big* bias in opinions towards the 35/2 being better optically. Both apparently have coma wide open, but on the 1.4 it is supposed to be much more obvious. I've seen night-scene pictures taken on the 1.4 that I find sad and unsatisfying because of the lights all turning tear-shaped away from the centre of the frame. It was *so* obviously a lens aberration, and it looked bad IMHO. I have used the f2 one wide open a lot (indoor photography) and have no problem with its performance. If I was a photojournalist the goalposts would be in a different place and 1.4 might well be essential. joe b.