A case for f2.8

[NeeZee]

Just want to share some of my experiences with various 70s fixed-lens RF's I owned and tested over the last few years.

Recently, the prices for used ones with faster lenses at about f2 (1.7, 1.8, 1.9) are reaching ridiculous heights while you can still often get one with a lens a stop slower for next to nothing (there are exceptions like the Oly 35rc, of course). This is not really surprising given the recent "bokeh" hype (also reflected by the increase of prices for fast old SLR and RF lenses).

But even if you're are on the bokeh bandwagon, consider this before you spend a fortune:

1. ALL of these cameras are rather soft wide open (even the Oly 35rd - the best i've tried)
2. The RF base length is short, so focusing closer subjects wide open is a hit and miss affair. Not so much a problem at f2.8.
3. Most of them improve vastly from f2.8 but most of the cheaper models are already really good (many as good) wide open (meaning at f2.8 as well).
4. They are often less compact than the slower lens models.

Don't get me wrong, I love these cameras and own and use a few of them - it's just having a look at the prices and the ridiculous amount of misfocused pics on flickr, I guess the newbies should be told that these are not Hexars or Leicas with Summicrons.

And no, this is no attempt to get the prices down 😉

 

[John Bragg]

I have found similar with the Mju-II (Stylus Epic) point and shoot. Prices are soaring for the f2.8 Epic whilst the older Stylus Infinity with an f3.5 offering is still selling for pennies. Apart from a few obvious differences, it is a very capable camera and doesnt suffer from being too restricted in depth of field as its more modern sibling does.

 

[btgc]

I agree. Most of times stop here or there doesn't matter. Forumgraphers love to talk about critical stop which helps them handhold camera and get famous shot. Let it be, if it helps them. If someone feels need of more shallow DOF this is another, but few people find good use for it.
Finally, most of f/1.4 lenses are sharper at f/2.8 than f/2.8 lenses. That is how I see it. Yet some fast lenses have sophisticated designs and coatings which makes them spectacular at moderate apertures. But some focal lengths by design are hard to screw up. And finally, let's just admit this, boys love toys and fast and specialty lenses are one of them.

Prices are soaring for the f2.8 Epic whilst the older Stylus Infinity with an f3.5 offering is still selling for pennies.

Bingo! And there are tons of very competent compacts (some even better than S.Epic) , some with f/2.8 lenses - just internet crowds haven't started to hunt them. And this is good! And f/3.5 lens isn't anything to put off in front of f/2.8 lens. Masses play by their rules, that's it...

 

[NeeZee]

good to see I'm not the only one wondering.

i can even kinda understand this whole bokeh thing as a response to the infinite dof of digital compacts. given the availability of high res high speed films (wasn't the case when these cameras were produced) a fast lens should actually matter less these days but apparently it's the opposite. i agree with your "masses play by the rules" point, btgc. seems as if the f-stop has become the film crowd's megapixels.

and yeah point and shoots are a similar story. kinda started with the terry richardson hype for the t4. then someone said the stylus epic/mju-ii is as good, the crowd believed and prices went up too. here in germany you still see many of them for <5€ on the flea markets. i should really start buying and put them on the bay...

 

[z.bruce.li]

There are plenty of cheap f/2.8 or f/3.5 fixed lens RF out there, and there is absolutely no need to follow the crowd. I do like the 35RC, but my Kodak Signet 35 with Ektar 44/3.5 gives me so many happy surprises.