Keith, M is a line of Pentax lenses in K mount dedicated for the M series cameras. M 135/3.5 is not a M-42 lens, but a PK bayonet lens.
And, well... what about my question? :) I'm pretty sure the hood is OK, but more positive feedback would be welcome :) Regards, Lukasz -----Original Message----- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 1:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Takumar lenshood for an M 135/3.5 Not sure you'll get this post in return. I have 5 posts backed up that were refused, for some reason... keith whaley Łukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > > Hi all, > my question has nothing to do with a DSLR, personal attacks, or... err - I > don't think we've seen anything else for the past few days :) > > I know the M 135/3.5 has a built-in hood, but it's very shallow, so I though > about getting something else for it. I have one that doesn't... Too old? Too new? What? Minew's a Super Takumar. No sliding or other built-in hood. Wait, are you talking about a "Pentax-M?" All these incomplete designations confuse... I don't have a history of the f/3.5 135mm M-42 lenses, so I'm not sure. > I found a beautiful metal hood for long > Takumars. It's got "Takumar 1:3.5 135mm, 1:4 150mm, 1:5.6 200mm" written on > it. It's dedicated for the same focal lenght, it has the same filter thread > diameter, so it shouldn't cause light fall-off, but I'm not sure. Anyone > ever used this combination? What's the easiest way to check whether a > lenshood is too long? > > Thanks in advance, > Łukasz > > PS. I'm sending this post again after it hasn't showed for 40 minutes, so > don't be surprised if it finally shows up twice - maybe next week :)
