28/2 or 35/2 : wich one performes better for low light ?

[teos]

<p>I am in the moment that I have the offer to buy one of these FD lenses ,that I intend to use on crop camera for low light .<br>

Wich one is better? the 28 is a SSC with chrome ring at base , the 35 is a FDn . The weight / bulk is important , but also the angle of wiew ( If they're equal quality, I'd prefere the 28)</p>

[awahlster]

<p>they are the same speed there for they will preform the same at gathering light.<br>

As to Image Quality no way to answer the question as Sample variation some 30-40 years after the lenses were made would cancel any anecdotal comments</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>They're both superb lenses, and you'd be hard pressed to distinguish them with respect to optical quality.</p>

<p>The earlier chrome-ringed breechlocks are a little heavier, but if you prefer 28mm, get the 28/2.</p>

[philip_wilson]

If you are using a digital body (that is what I take from the term crop body) then I would probably go wider. I have the

24F2, 28F2.8 ( not a great lens) and the 35F2. When I shoot them on M4/3 I generally find I use the 24 the most.

[User_502260]

<p>I have a 24/2.8 FD SSC with a chrome front but I have never seen a 28/2 FD SSC with a chrome front. My 28/2 FD SSC is excellent. I have more than one example of the 28/2.8 New FD and 28/2.8 FD SC lenses. The New FD is not bad if stopped down a little. The FD SC is very good. </p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Sorry, Jeff, I was referring to the mounting ring of the FD BL lenses, which is aluminum and not chrome. As far as I know, there are no faster FD primes with chrome noses.</p>

[teos]

<p>I am anxiously waiting for the 28/2 SSC !!!</p>