Crazy, really. The 3.5s are perfectly fine, and have an f2.8 viewing lens anyway. The build quality is identical, and there was time when a clean late 3.5F was only a couple of hundred quid behind a 2.8F.
Barely ever shot wide open with mine, so I didn't miss the extra speed.
2.8s are definitely attractive to collectors, but if you actually take photographs, just think how much film and processing £720 buys you.
Crazy, really. The 3.5s are perfectly fine, and have an f2.8 viewing lens anyway. The build quality is identical, and there was time when a clean late 3.5F was only a couple of hundred quid behind a 2.8F.
Barely ever shot wide open with mine, so I didn't miss the extra speed.
2.8s are definitely attractive to collectors, but if you actually take photographs, just think how much film and processing £720 buys you.