Mostly it is rarity. Not very many 40/2s were made. Some of it is the
small/cute factor, which I well understand, witness my fondness for the
35-70/3.5-4.5.
The price is certainly unrelated to optical performance. Even those who
have and love them generally admit they are soft at f2 and otherwise
fine, but nothing special. I've never had either, but Gary's tests show
the 35/2 to be as good or better in resolution and better in contrast,
than the 40/2. Of course, if you can step back a bit, a 50/1.8 miJ is a
better lens for less than 1/10 the price.
Moose
gordross@xxxxxxx wrote:
>Hi Joe:
>
>As per Rob Harrison's idea of subj. evaluation, what is the fascination for
>the 'press lens', 'pancake lens' I am not being sarcastic, I am not familiar
>with it and would like to know if it is its rarity or it's delectability
>that commands 3 to 4 times the price I would look at for a 35/2.0?
>
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|