28/3.5 old versus newgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Konica 35mm SLRs : One Thread
I just acquired a 28/3.5 (older f/16 version). I have been wanting to compare the f/16 versus the f/22 for some time now. so, i will do some tests a la mike lepard when the weather clears up here in boston.
first impression of the 28/3.5 (f/16 version): much heftier than the f/22 version, much larger front element, and longer. it's sort of like the same difference in look and feel as the 50/1.4 versus the 50/1.7.
for me the purpose of doing lens tests is to validate reviews. plus, it gives me something to do :)
-- Anonymous, March 31, 2001
hi folks--- i just got my slides back comparing:
(1) the slow hexanon 28's (3.5 - 16 version versus the 3.5 - 22 version),
(2) the 50/1.4, 1.7 and 40/1.8
(3) the 135/3.2 hexanon and 135/3.5 hexar.
to summarize: my results are consistent with what everyone has said in the past. the 28/3.5-16 is ever-so slightly better than the 22 version, the normals are all consistently great even at f/4, the 135 hexar is not quite as good as the hexanon.
-- Anonymous, April 03, 2001