[gavincato]

hi guys

I'm sure this has been answered somewhere before and I apologise for the duplication. I've been googling but can't find a straight answer.

For landscapes only - is there any difference optically in the older version 35mm 3.5 you can get on ebay for roughly $400-$600'ish, or the very latest brand new version that is $1600'ish.

I don't mind spending the money on the new one if needed, I'm assuming the latest version has better coatings or similar - but basically, what difference is there apart from autofocus?

cheers

Gav

[jrpower10]

They are not the same optical formula, for what that's worth. I have the older, A version, and I think it's a terrific lens. For me I went this route for economics since from the forum reviews both seem to be good (although there are only 2 reviews of the FA version), and I don't really care about autofocus given I mostly shoot landscapes.

---------- Post added 05-20-15 at 09:40 AM ----------

It's interesting to me that there are quite a number of active forum members that shoot 645 system, but lens reviews seem somewhat lacking, in some cases (examples; there are only 2 reviews of the FA 35 and only 1 of the 33-55). I'll start writing a few once I get a little more time in the system under my belt, but it sure would be nice if other shooters would share their views in the lens review database (hint hint).

[Thomas]

I've had both a FA and A version of this lens. I, and most users I've read, prefer the A version on digital.

[672]

I had both and the A was actually a wider field of view……..

[Chris Giles]

IQ is about the same (I have both), for anything moving FA version all the way but for landscapes and non moving objects and if I didn't own one, the A version.

Both are excellent though.

[gavincato]

thanks guys, I'll order the A version. I don't need AF for it. cheers

[Chris Giles]

I'll be listing mine in the buy and sell page shortly Gavin, just not got around to it just yet.

[algrove]

I have the A verson and find it even works for the occasional street shooting since the 645Z beeps focus confirmation when not zone focusing.

[gavincato]

I'll be listing mine in the buy and sell page shortly Gavin, just not got around to it just yet.

Sorry if I knew you were selling I'd have messaged you but I'm going interstate next weekend and wanted it for then

[bull drinkwater]

my $0.02 worth, for landscapes, and action shots, manual focus has not been a big deal. I have 3 fa lenses, but as I use the 1.4 and 2.0 tc's a lot I am forced to rely on manual focus.

[2351HD]

I believe that the FA version suffers from some field curvature making a soft ring 2/3 of the way out from te image centre. This could be avoided by stopping down I guess.

I have the A and I feel it has some field curvature also, but that's just on the outside which is easier to deal with. The A is a great lens.

[gavincato]

my A version just arrived. It is incredibly sharp in the center but a touch soft at the edges. Still significantly better than my canon 16-35 though! I'll give it a proper work out later tonight.

[batmobile]

I have the A version and its tack sharp into the extreme corners at medium apertures. You have to ensure you focus with live view, or enter any focus calibration required, because if you focus short, your edges will fall to bits. Mine is miles off if I use focus confirmation 'beeps' (focuses way short), but using live view its incredible.

A truly tremendous lens.

[gavincato]

hey guys just wanted to say thanks for the recommendations on the older style 35mm lens - it is a spectacular piece of glass, I love using it.