Originally posted by ivanvernon You dun good, real good. That 67 75/2.8 is sure giving some sharp results. I have the 67 75mm, but mine is the f 4.5 version, which is also quite sharp. The 2.8 seems to sell for quite a bit more than the 4.5, just wondering how different the two lenses are in terms of actual results. Congratulations on being over where there is some scenery,not much to tax the imagination here in flat northern Ohio at this time of year. Hope you get some more chances while you are there. Of course, you can always do some buildings and street photography.
Thank you, sir. Glad you like 'em.
I used to own the 67 75mm f4.5 (before getting the f2.8 AL around 2004) and both are very good. I would say that the f2.8 is a little sharper and MUCH easier to focus precisely; the brighter viewfinder it provides is worth a lot. If you zoom in on digi, you can see the difference in resolution. There is perhaps a little more geometric distortion on the f2.8 version, but it's not huge - or obvious with my type of subject matter. The digital rendering is rather film-like - and there is a little purple fringing in specular highlights (which cleans up nicely). IMO both are superior to the 645 75mm options...
As for more chances, I am back home in London and back at work - so I got what I got (some more uploads will follow soon).