nobbylon
Veteran
One taken with that first copy,

nobbylon
Veteran
one more,

Ronald M
Veteran
Nothing like testing your own and then you don`t need to depend upon others.
Bless you and Putts if you have a good one. I just could never find one.
Bless you and Putts if you have a good one. I just could never find one.
ampguy
Veteran
same here
same here
had both the v3, and v2. loved the v3's close focus, but the glass/coatings/whetever is just not the same quality as the v2s. So I gave up close focus for just better image quality, and build quality of the v2.
same here
had both the v3, and v2. loved the v3's close focus, but the glass/coatings/whetever is just not the same quality as the v2s. So I gave up close focus for just better image quality, and build quality of the v2.
Cam, I have had the v2 pre-asph and the v3 pre-asph, too. Currently I have a v2, largely because of what you describe above. I know the v2 and v3 pre-asphs are identical in terms of optical design, but I prefer the v2 and I do think it is because the "improved" coatings on the v3 pre-asph do change some aspects of the rendering -- not much, but enough to make the OOF areas a little less "sweet" as you suggest. In addition to the rendering of the v2, I prefer its size to the v3.
When I require a .7m MFD and absolute sharpness in a 50, I reach for the asph. It is the better performer technically, but for some reason I do prefer the 'sweetness' of my old v2 pre-asph in most cases.
Share: