I have not found teleconverters very good - it is a good idea but quality usually suffers - long teles the exception. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-----Alkuper�inen viesti----- L�hett�j�: Evan Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> P�iv�: 29. tammikuuta 2003 16:05 Aihe: Re: Pentax FA lenses--some thoughts >Mike would you consider this combo: >FA 24/2 >FA 50/1.4 (no substitute for speed) >and an 1.7 AF teleconvertor for portraits. > >Evan > > >Mike Johnston kindly wrote: > >> One possibility for the upcoming show is that there may be a new FILM body >> from Pentax. Pal keeps hoping for an "AF LX," and it's also possible that >> there may be a new "budget/serious" camera one tier below the MZ-S (which >I >> can't afford). >> >> So I've been trying to think about FA lens outfits recently. I don't >> currently own any FA lenses, but there are a number I'm attracted to. >> >> What I do is general snapshooting in black-and-white. I'm a great fan of >> 35mm normal lenses, but also of the 50/1.4 Pentax lens. Generally, what I >> need is an all-purpose lens, and also a portrait lens. But a 50mm is too >> long to be my widest lens. Here's what I've shot with over the past few >> years: >> >> --Just a 50mm. >> >> --a 35mm and an 85mm. >> >> --a 50mm, an 85mm for portraits, and a wider lens--since the wider lens is >> mostly for indoors, it needs to be pretty fast. >> >> Personally, since my long(er)-lens use is _exclusively_ for portraits, I'm >> leaning towards the 85mm f/1.4. The 77mm also has a great reputation and >has >> a better form-factor. So one obvious kit would be the 85/1.4 and the 35/2. >A >> kit comprising the 35/2 and the 77mm would also be very nice. >> >> But that leaves me without my stone favorite 50/1.4. If I were to add >that, >> I'd want to use it as my "most of the time normal lens." At that point, >the >> 35/2 becomes rather superfluous, and I'd rather move a bit further away on >> the wide and tele ends...which would mean a three-lens kit with the 24/2 >or >> 31mm, 50/1.4, and 77 or 85mm. Since 77mm is rather closer to 50mm than to >> 35mm, this thought pushes me more towards the 85mm again. >> >> The trouble with this is that, in the real world, I don't have very much >> cash. So to think of buying both the very expensive 31mm and the very >> expensive 85mm is rather daunting...especially when the inexpensive 50mm >> would be my "most of the time" lens. >> >> I'd like to begin investing in a kit of FA lenses, but I'm unsure of which >> way to go. I could do any of the following... >> >> --50/1.4 only (not really a very flexible option). >> --35/2 and 85/1.4. >> --35/2 and 77mm. >> --31mm, 50/1.4, and 85mm. >> --24/2, 50/1.4, and 85mm. >> >> --something else--? >> >> My little brother Scott has insisted for years that I am very good at >giving >> advice to others, but not very good at choosing things for myself. His >> reasoning is that I remain objective and clear-headed when I give advice >to >> others, but when I'm shopping for myself, I succumb to emotion and >> fetishizing and hair-splittng, and make dumb decisions. >> >> What would you recommend? Keep in mind I want an _optimum_ 2- or 3-lens FA >> kit for my uses, not something that will just "get me by." >> >> --Mike >> >> P.S. This is not a troll. I'm serious. <s> >> >> >
