Given that the Nikon SW 90 F8 offers 15-20 mm more coverage than the competing 9 0 F8 offerings from Schneider and Rodenstock, with quite similiar pricing and we ights why would the Nikon not be a better choice? Previous threads reveal that Nikon is a little "warmer", and the Rodenstock more "contrasty". Is there any downside to this apparent free gain in coverage?
Bookmarks