efix
RF user by conviction
I know, this is a question noone can really answer but myself, but still, it's circulating inside my head and I was hoping for some stimulating opinions from you folks.
I currently have both the M-Rokkor 28/2.8 and the Ultron 28/1.9 for my M8. I'm about to send the Rokkor in for removing the tiny bubbles inside which affect contrast, as I was going to sell it but noone wanted it with that separation thing going on. Now I'm thinking of keeping it once it is repaired, and instead selling the Ultron. But here's the probem:
The Rokkor is really small, which I like for a walkaround lens. Once the separation problem is fixed, it'll be like new optically. I liked how it drawed while I was using it, and it's sharper at f/2.8 than the Ultron.
The Ultron, on the other hand, I got in almost mint condition for a very good price. It goes to f/1.9, which is handy in low light. I also like how it draws, and I like the shallower d-o-f I get from it wide open. On the downside, it's really large and heavy for a 35mm-equivalent f/2 lens, which kinda spoils the whole experience. The Rokkor is so much nicer to handle.
So, once the Rokkor is back from repair, I'll have two excellent 28's, both with their strengths and weaknesses. The question will be which one to keep, as I can't justify keeping both. I guess I'll do some side-by-side shooting for a few weeks and then decide.
One argument for keeping the Ultron, despite only having owned it for a couple months and really having grown fond of it, is that if light gets low, I'll just grab my E-P1 + 20/1.7 if I want a wider field of view than my 50 Nokton gives me.
What do you think? What would you do?
I currently have both the M-Rokkor 28/2.8 and the Ultron 28/1.9 for my M8. I'm about to send the Rokkor in for removing the tiny bubbles inside which affect contrast, as I was going to sell it but noone wanted it with that separation thing going on. Now I'm thinking of keeping it once it is repaired, and instead selling the Ultron. But here's the probem:
The Rokkor is really small, which I like for a walkaround lens. Once the separation problem is fixed, it'll be like new optically. I liked how it drawed while I was using it, and it's sharper at f/2.8 than the Ultron.
The Ultron, on the other hand, I got in almost mint condition for a very good price. It goes to f/1.9, which is handy in low light. I also like how it draws, and I like the shallower d-o-f I get from it wide open. On the downside, it's really large and heavy for a 35mm-equivalent f/2 lens, which kinda spoils the whole experience. The Rokkor is so much nicer to handle.
So, once the Rokkor is back from repair, I'll have two excellent 28's, both with their strengths and weaknesses. The question will be which one to keep, as I can't justify keeping both. I guess I'll do some side-by-side shooting for a few weeks and then decide.
One argument for keeping the Ultron, despite only having owned it for a couple months and really having grown fond of it, is that if light gets low, I'll just grab my E-P1 + 20/1.7 if I want a wider field of view than my 50 Nokton gives me.
What do you think? What would you do?
