I bought one "New in a Box" for more than I should have spent, (and it was /like/ /new/ when I got it, only missing the original included dedicated case), and I find it to be a wonderful little lens. The prices on them tend to fluctuate quite a bit. These lenses were not meant to be extra sharp wide open but to produce pleasing portraits. Now with digital aps-c sized sensors they fall into the AOV of a traditional general purpose telephoto such as a 135mm would, where sharpness would be more of an issue. That doesn't invalidate the fact that the lens fulfills it's original purpose quite well, and still fulfills it's new purpose more than adequately.
-----Original Message----- >From: Scott Loveless <[email protected]> >Sent: Feb 7, 2009 10:12 AM >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: short tele primes > >On 2/7/09, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[email protected]> wrote: >> I had the M85/2. Got it very cheap as everyone seemed to feel it wasn't >> sharp, had poor bokeh, etc etc. I found it to be actually a rather nice >> lens. When I sold it, the average price I was seeing had more than doubled. > >The price on those lenses peaked a few years ago. They're cheaper now >that I have one. > >-- >Scott Loveless >Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 >http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow >the directions. -- I want to die peacfuly in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming like the passengers in his car... Will Shriner -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
