Originally posted by lytrytyr I think that the link you cite says it all: "I am therefore inclined to question the real benefit of faster lenses..." That's a mighty fine inclination to have, and one should always question everything .... but some guy doing that doesn't make it a fact
Yes, the benefit gain (in terms of light falling on the sensor) may be marginal at wider apertures....then again, sometimes margins do make the difference. And in any event, that's only half of the story; DoF is another kettle of fish.
So, to me, the DA Limiteds make very little sense in that regard: they're supposed to be top-of-the-line, yet they do not go that extra step.
I love that the FA Ltd were f/1.x lenses, and was (and am) hugely disappointed to see that the DA Limited went f/(>2.x).
This is a strictly unscientific, subjective and possible "apples-to-oranges" test but I can clearly see the difference in both brightness (viewfinder, AF) and DoF on the DA Ltd 70/2.4 and the FA Ltd 77/1.8. While not identical, the focal lengths are "sufficiently similar" for the comparison to make sense to me.
I fully appreciate that making f/1.x lenses carry costs, but as the Ltd range is supposed to be "top of the line" I'd like to see a couple of more f/1.x.
Yes, the 55/1.4 renders me ecstatic ... I used to love the Olympus Zuiko 50/1.2 - in case you didn't figure, my "inclination" is towards faster glass (& to think that the DxOMark dude is mistaken
)