I do not have that but I have the test results issue 2/2003 of Foto Magazin (GER) and they give the Pentax 100 macro 9.2 optically and 9.4 mechanically - and this is approximately the best so far. The Voigtlander APO 2.4/125 gets 9.8/9.8, though. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-----Alkuper�inen viesti----- L�hett�j�: Peter Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> P�iv�: 05. helmikuuta 2003 0:15 Aihe: Re: Vs: PDMLDSLR >Popular Photography raved about the Pentax 100mm macro >& all other reports by users say it's amazing. > > > >--- Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: >> I�m not Mike but I have Practical Photography >> November 2000 issue in front of me. In the test >> 90-105 mm macro lenses get the following points: >> Canon AF 100/2.8 - 9/10 >> Minolta AF 100/2.8 - 9/10 >> Nikon AF 105/2.8D - 7/10 >> Pentax AF 100/2.8 - 6/10 >> Sigma AF 105/28 EX - 9/10 >> Tamron AF 90/2.8 SP - 9/10 >> Tokina AF 100/2.8 AT-X 6/10 >> Pentax 100 mm performs well but needs stopping down >> and is expensive. >> All the best! >> Raimo >> Personal photography homepage at >> http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho >> >> -----Alkuper�inen viesti----- >> L�hett�j�: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> P�iv�: 04. helmikuuta 2003 16:59 >> Aihe: Re: PDMLDSLR >> >> >> >Hi Mike, >> > >> >Do you have any access to tests of macro lenses? >> >I own Tamron manual SP 90/2.8 macro, I bought it >> when found that it performed much better Pentax 100m >> in one Popular or Practical Photography if I >> remember well and also beat Nikkor 105mm >> >I wonder if you ever used the lens. Is it really >> better than Pentax lens? I also own SMC K105/2.8 >> lense (very nice indeed) so here was another reason >> to choose 90mm to have a both portrait and macro >> lens.Or maybe to sell it and buy FA100/2.8 macro.. >> >If you happen to have any official tests please >> drop me a line.I also wonder how good FA200/4 ED >> macro lens is.Any comments/tests? >> >Sorry for not writing from PDML but would like to >> have direct contact.Please write to this address. >> >Thanks in advance. >> >PS BTW Do you have any tests from K lenses era?Do >> you think Zeiss T lenses are better/much better than >> Pentax primes?Now the price of manual Zeiss glass is >> not very high. I even think to sell my Pentax gear >> and buy new Aria+some primes (used).But it will not >> allow me to buy into digital with them, AF etc. So >> maybe it is better to stick to Pentax. I own some K >> lenses (28/3.5 , 105/2.8 135/2.5 all SMC and A50/1.4 >> and M35/2.8 and SUper A+PZ1+Metz 40MZ3i) >> >How do you think?I mainly take slides >> > >> >Please answer >> >Alek >> > >> > >> >U�ytkownik Mike Johnston >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisa�: >> >>>P.S. I propose a new division of terms for this >> discussion: >> >> >> >>> P-DSLR: Any old Pentax Digital Single Lens >> Reflex, even, or especially, a >> >>>crappy cheapo cynical rushed-to-market cobbled-up >> little 3-mp mass-market >> >>>sensor jobbie that\'ll have us all moaning and >> groaning and venting; >> >> >> >>> PDMLDSLR: Pentax Discuss Mailing List Digital >> Single Lens Reflex, for a >> >>>thoughtfully designed, well-executed camera that >> many of us would at least be >> >>>inFrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Feb 5 07:47:19 2003 >Received: from host24.websitesource.com (host24.websitesource.com [209.239.33.40]) > by uusikaupunki.fi (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA09488 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 07:47:18 +0200 (EET) >Received: (from dbrewer@localhost) > by host24.websitesource.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) id h155lE026944; > Wed, 5 Feb 2003 00:47:14 -0500 >Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 00:33:58 -0500 >X-Authentication-Warning: host24.websitesource.com: dbrewer set sender to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 00:31:16 -0500 >From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I) >X-Accept-Language: en >MIME-Version: 1.0 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Women of the PDML Re: OT Pentax wife >References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Resent-Message-ID: <"JOfco.A.3DG.GJKQ-"@host24.websitesource.com> >Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Mailing-List: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archive/latest/15014 >X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Precedence: list >Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Content-Length: 1073 > >Pat wrote: > >> Kathy L wrote: >> >> > And this sister uses a PZ-1p and all the gear I can carry in my vest with >> > all the pockets. >> > leickly story (kathy) >> >> This prompts me to ask the other sisters: >> How do you carry a Pentax on a non-shooting project basis? Say that you were >> carrying one SLR body of your choice plus one lens (be it zoom or prime) and >> were just going about your daily business (work, school, shopping, etc.) and >> trying to be inconspicuous. Purses? Lunch sacks? Backpacks? Waist packs? Do >> tell. >> >> Pat in SF > >I used to carry a throw-a-way in my belly bag going too and from work - just in >case .... >Have used one of those things for keeping soda cool as a camera bag because it >doesnt >look like i'm carrying anything valuable. Usually, though, it is an inexpensive >looking cloth >shopping bag that I've padded a bit . I never use a real camera bag except on >long trips. > >ann in NY > >> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do you Yahoo!? >> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. >> http://mailplus.yahoo.com >
