Firstly, many thanks for the encouraging comments. I will follow the posts
with interest & look forward to the annual book.
I am a retired Analytical Chemist living in Phalaborwa, a small Lowveld town
in the extreme NE of SA supported by copper & phosphate mines. The climate
is hot with about 530
I think it was announced with the lens. But then again I haven't seen
any official,specifications on the new converter yet. Maybe it's a
screw motor pass trough or an A only style. But we don't know yet.
On 2/12/2012 4:49 AM, Margus Männik wrote:
And once again I have to ask - where is the 1
I totally agree Margus!
stan
On Feb 12, 2012, at 4:49 AM, Margus Männik wrote:
> And once again I have to ask - where is the 1.4x SDM teleconverter? They have
> planned it for years, what makes it is so hard to design / produce? 560mm
> sounds nice in theory, but in practice I rather would car
And once again I have to ask - where is the 1.4x SDM teleconverter? They
have planned it for years, what makes it is so hard to design / produce?
560mm sounds nice in theory, but in practice I rather would carry
60-250mm or 300mm (which I do have already) + a little high-quality TC.
BRM
On 2
One model has GPS and the other doesn't. It actually correlates with
the color of the body, but I can't remember which is which.
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> Optio WG-2 is now showing on Adorama ($399) and B&H ($349) for preorder.
> B&H price is $50 less than Adorama's b
Optio WG-2 is now showing on Adorama ($399) and B&H ($349) for preorder.
B&H price is $50 less than Adorama's but Adorama's mentions GPS
functionality and B&H's doesn't. ???
A hands-on gallery:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/9/2786252/pentax-optio-wg-2-gps-hands-on
Darren Addy
Kearney, Nebraska
On 2012-02-08 14:31, John Celio wrote:
2. smc PENTAX-DA 560mm F5.6
I'd love to have it, but doubt that I ever will. For one thing, I
already have a Sigma APO 400/5.6 Macro in PK AF mount that works just
fine. For another, I also have the 1.7AF T/C, and it works just fine
with the Sigma.
>> 3. smc PENTAX-DA 50mm F1.8
>> I'll probably sell my FA 50mm 1.4 to get this lens.
>
> Why? I'd rather have the FA 1.4, myself.
My 50 1.4 has never been all that great. I got it cheap from KEH (I
think it was BGN rated) many years ago and rarely use it. The lens'
plastic window over the focus m
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 11:31:54AM -0800, John Celio wrote:
>
> 3. smc PENTAX-DA 50mm F1.8
> I'll probably sell my FA 50mm 1.4 to get this lens.
Why? I'd rather have the FA 1.4, myself.
> 6. Adapter Q for K mount lens
> This product was inevitable, but I'm glad they're releasing it
> relativel
Bob Sullivan wrote:
Thought these were interestin, referencing the LX.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=32149442
Regards, Bob S.
I love that attention to detail.
D
--
der...@iinet.net.au
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail Li
Thanks for the link. This confirms the impression that Pentax
designers really care about the feel of the camera. This description
shows that they are "designers" in the best sense of the word, not
mere price-point production engineers. I think that it is the same
passion for design that m
Of course, but those who don't wanna mess with the PC, it is built-in.
Still nice to have.
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Toine wrote:
> A very nice marketing argument. If I plan to shoot HDR and carry a
> tripod I would prefer 3 raw files anytime.
>
> Toine
>
> 2009/5/21 Thibouille :
>> For th
A very nice marketing argument. If I plan to shoot HDR and carry a
tripod I would prefer 3 raw files anytime.
Toine
2009/5/21 Thibouille :
> For those who care:
>
> http://www.adorama.com/alc/blogarticle/11608
>
>
> --
> Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
> --
> Photo: K10D,Z1,Su
2009/5/21 Thibouille :
> For those who care:
>
> http://www.adorama.com/alc/blogarticle/11608
>
>
> --
> Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
> --
> Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...
> Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB
> Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007)
>
> --
> PDML Pe
Ditto!
Bong
On Jan 3, 2008 12:30 AM, Rebekah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi David, happy new year!
>
> I love the second one - the colors are very vivid and the backlighting
> really makes it gorgeous. The first one looks kind of flat to me -
> maybe a lack of a range of values, but it is an in
Dave: The tree/bush in the background is a bit distracting behind
birdfeeder. The second photo is just lovely. Very nice color. I like the
BW as well, but probably I like the color best. Oh, and thanks for the
clarification on the MR. Cheers, Christine
- Original Message -
From:
Thanks Rebekah, Paul, Jack, Mike H. and Godfrey.
I don';t really use the incamera filters(B&W) but i did for this one,
just to see how it would look.
Mike, your is very good.
Dave
On Jan 2, 2008 1:42 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 2, 2008, at 7:00 AM, David J Brooks
On Jan 2, 2008, at 7:00 AM, David J Brooks wrote:
> http://photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=362905
>
> One colour, one a B&W converted in the K10D and a bit of LR
> adjustments. Mostly lightend
> d up the darks, and dropped the high lights a bit and a crop to get
> rid of a bit
David,
The heavy dark stem area to the right of the blossom is a real
distraction. Beautiful blossom in itself, but the play of shadows on
the pedals compromises its impact. For me, the pedal shadows are more
obvious on the b&w version.(?)
Jack
--- David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I lo
Definitely prefer the color version of the flower. Nice shot.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Rebekah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi David, happy new year!
>
> I love the second one - the colors are very vivid and the backlighting
> really makes it gorgeous. The first
On 2-Jan-08, at 9:09 AM, Dave Brooks wrote:
> I loaded up two Christmas cactus shots on to Photo dot net.
>
> http://photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=362905
>
> One colour, one a B&W converted in the K10D and a bit of LR
> adjustments. Mostly lightend
> d up the darks, and dropp
Hi David, happy new year!
I love the second one - the colors are very vivid and the backlighting
really makes it gorgeous. The first one looks kind of flat to me -
maybe a lack of a range of values, but it is an interesting shot and
title. :) I have to say that I like the flower in color better,
Godfrey DiGiorgi affirmed:
> No question: for a film SLR, buy the Pentax standard hood. It's the
> most convenient in use.
That's what I'll do as soon as the test film returns.
> I tested the 24-90 briefly and bought the 28-105/3.2-4.5 instead due
> to the difference in price, but after a whi
No question: for a film SLR, buy the Pentax standard hood. It's the
most convenient in use.
I tested the 24-90 briefly and bought the 28-105/3.2-4.5 instead due
to the difference in price, but after a while I found that the
28-105's shortcomings when wide open at the longer tele settings
w
On Aug 27, 2006, at 1:25 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
>> Any lens hood is a compromise on a zoom lens at some point or
>> another. A tulip shaped hood gives a little more coverage than a
>> barrel shaped hood, but only in a four-pronged shape that has edges
>> which must be oriented correctly
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Any lens hood is a compromise on a zoom lens at some point or
> another. A tulip shaped hood gives a little more coverage than a
> barrel shaped hood, but only in a four-pronged shape that has edges
> which must be oriented correctly or you get vignet
Godfrey,
As I was trying to say, following your advice would mean I'd have to get
myself an *istDxxx or something like that. I'm still on film, there's
only two P&S digis around here (whereas one of them is an Oly C-5050,
which isn't P&S only).
Thel lens arrived yesterday, I'll try it and if i
On Aug 26, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
>> Tulip shaped hoods are a compromise too. ;-)
>
> How?
Any lens hood is a compromise on a zoom lens at some point or
another. A tulip shaped hood gives a little more coverage than a
barrel shaped hood, but only in a four-pronged shap
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Tulip shaped hoods are a compromise too. ;-)
How?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Aug 25, 2006, at 11:40 AM, Pancho Hasselbach wrote:
> A wideangle hood for 67mm filter thread might be quite bulky, and, as
> you say, of little use on the long end, but I think the original
> hood is
> a little better due to the tulip form. ...
I wasn't thinking of a wideangle hood. A lens
Godfrey DiGiorgi schrieb:
> On Aug 25, 2006, at 1:26 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>>
>>> A simple Kalt or similar generic 67mm metal screw in lens hood will
>>> do a reasonable job. It won't be optimal for the lens at 90mm focal
>>> length, but
On Aug 25, 2006, at 1:26 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
>> A simple Kalt or similar generic 67mm metal screw in lens hood will
>> do a reasonable job. It won't be optimal for the lens at 90mm focal
>> length, but it will be good enough for most pu
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> A simple Kalt or similar generic 67mm metal screw in lens hood will
> do a reasonable job. It won't be optimal for the lens at 90mm focal
> length, but it will be good enough for most purposes so as not to
> matter.
I think one may struggle for a 24
A simple Kalt or similar generic 67mm metal screw in lens hood will
do a reasonable job. It won't be optimal for the lens at 90mm focal
length, but it will be good enough for most purposes so as not to
matter.
Such things are available in the US for about $10, less if found used
in a swap
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Pancho Hasselbach wrote:
> I guess the hood will do a good job around that big front lens. I looked
> into an older Pentax pricelist, where the hood alone was listed for 69,-
> EUR. I'll see what my local dealer can do, I just want to wait for the
> lens to arrive and to be OK
Thanks Kostas,
I guess the hood will do a good job around that big front lens. I looked
into an older Pentax pricelist, where the hood alone was listed for 69,-
EUR. I'll see what my local dealer can do, I just want to wait for the
lens to arrive and to be OK, before I spend more money. I think
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Pancho Hasselbach wrote:
> Of course, Joe made the point by telling how good the lens is in it's
> own zoom range. No scary details that make me lie awake all night, or
> such. So I bought it from a dealer who, the hood unfortunately being not
> included, sold it to me for 180
Gentlemen,
thank you very much for your advice.
Of course, Joe made the point by telling how good the lens is in it's
own zoom range. No scary details that make me lie awake all night, or
such. So I bought it from a dealer who, the hood unfortunately being not
included, sold it to me for 180 E
Pancho,
Very, very nice lens. I bought the 28-70/4 and the
24-90 simultaneously a few years ago, and exposed one
roll of slide film with each using my PZ-1p. +NO+
contest. The 24-90 was sharper and contrastier, with
similar distortion and bokeh. The extra 4mm on the
wide end and 20mm on the te
A very good lens in this zoom range.
Joe
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Pancho,
I picked one up recently on eBay and I quite like it.
Here's a sample low-res pic taken with this lens.
INFO: MZ-S, 540FGZ flash (bounced 90 degrees with
catchlight panel) not sure what focal length maybe
40-50mm, probably f5.6 or 8, Kodak HD400 consumer
film.
http://www.members.aol.com/
On Apr 6, 2006, at 9:21 AM, Martin Trautmann wrote:
BTW: are there any known details why 20/2.8, 24/2.0 and 28/2.8 where
discontinued, although these lenses where good quality, good value and
even more suitable for DSLR crop factors?
Poor sales.
-Aaron
On 2006-04-04 10:52, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Any comments on the quality of the subject lens?
AFAIK it's very good value.
BTW: are there any known details why 20/2.8, 24/2.0 and 28/2.8 where
discontinued, although these lenses where good quality, good value and
even more suitable for DSLR crop f
On 4/5/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any comments on the quality of the subject lens?
>
>
> Shel
>
Only, "I've never used it"
HTH
Dave ;-)
--
"All I ask is the chance to prove that money can't make me happy." -
Spike Milligan
Thanks, I did try now but it is no longer on their list.
Henk
> -Original Message-
> From: Thibouille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 05 April, 2006 2:59 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Comments on 28mm F2.8 FA AL
>
>
> Did you try www.te
Only have the SMC-F version (not AL I think).
I think it is a different design but focal is really nice on my D and
focussing is sure hell fast (due to very short focussing ring ramp).
On 4/4/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any comments on the quality of the subject lens?
>
-
> > From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 05 April, 2006 12:56 AM
> > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> > Subject: Re: Comments on 28mm F2.8 FA AL
> >
> >
> > Thanks Perry, Mark, Godders ...
> >
> > I'm musing over wh
Thanks for your comments, Dave. Everyone seems happy with the lens, so
it's now on my very short list.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: David Oswald
> I tried a few times to buy the FA35/2 a year ago, and kept missing them
> on eBay and B&H. Finally I gave up. A few months later I got my
uss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Comments on 28mm F2.8 FA AL
>
>
> Thanks Perry, Mark, Godders ...
>
> I'm musing over which will be the next lens I get for the
> istDS ... either the FA28/2.8 or the FA35/2.0
>
> The FA20~35 is definitely on the list as well
>
>
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Hi,
Any comments on the quality of the subject lens?
Shel
Shel,
I tried a few times to buy the FA35/2 a year ago, and kept missing them
on eBay and B&H. Finally I gave up. A few months later I got myself
the SMC Pentax-FA 28mm f/2.8 AL. It has become my most ofte
Shel,
I'll just add "me too" to Perry, Mark and Godfrey's remarks. I have
it, and it makes for a very nice wider normal on the D bodies.
j
On 4/4/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Perry, Mark, Godders ...
>
> I'm musing over which will be the next lens I get for the istDS ..
Thanks Perry, Mark, Godders ...
I'm musing over which will be the next lens I get for the istDS ... either
the FA28/2.8 or the FA35/2.0
The FA20~35 is definitely on the list as well
Shel
> Any comments on the quality of the subject lens?
Everything I've seen taken with it shows it to be an excellent
performer. It's very similar (a little smaller) to the FA35/2 AL in
weight and feel, rendering. I am tempted to go for one although I
really don't need it.
The focal length is a very nice "wide-normal" on 16x24, one of my
favo
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>Any comments on the quality of the subject lens?
My perennial vote for "best bang for the buck" in Pentax's line-up.
Shel,
It is a nice lens. Size, weight and handling is similar to the FA
50/1.7. Sharpness is very good. Auto focus is pretty fast. The
manual focusing ring is not great but it is OK.
Perry.
On 4/4/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any comments on the quality of the subje
On Tuesday, December 06, 2005, at 11:46AM, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... The only
>downside I can think of is it doesn't play protected AAC audio files
>(Songs purchased through iTunes).
Or lossless format. However, a workaround is to burn an audio CD with titles
you want on the p
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
The iPod is a music [video] player, not a standalone image storage
device except for the most casual use.
An Epson P2000 plays music, perfoms video and image presentation on a
nice big screen, allows preview inspection of both JPEG and RAW format
files, and will dow
The iPod is a music [video] player, not a standalone image storage
device except for the most casual use.
An Epson P2000 plays music, perfoms video and image presentation on a
nice big screen, allows preview inspection of both JPEG and RAW
format files, and will download 13-15 full 1G memor
At those transfer rates, using an IPod would be very painful and not
usable for me - I have events where the card needs to be used again in
10-15 minutes. My CompactDrive transfers a gigabyte in a few minutes.
And it will transfer at least 10 gigabytes per battery charge.
Thanks for the report, i
Hi Marcus,
thanks for commenting on the photograph. My reasoning was quite broad
on the interpretation on the theme. The horizon running directly
through the heads, which is contradicting rules directly, is one of
the reasons. Multiple photography by turists was the other one.
I do agree, my i
Markus, thanks for the comments on this PUG.
The brightness of the figure on the right side was corrected on my PUG
picture in PS but I couldn't get it fully OK. A better picture of this
shop (this kitsch shop is at Deventer in Holland) is for me at
http://www.dewindvanvoorne.nl/fotoalbum/Build
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Comments on Pentax Zoom 105R
Hi,
One of these puppies just fell into my lap last night and I'm
deciding what
to do with it. Does anyone have any comments on this camera, any
experience with it?
We have it's predecssor around somewher
Thanks Andre, as soon as I get it and check it out I'll
let you know.
Don
> -Original Message-
> From: Andre Langevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 2:46 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Comments on SMCP 45-125/4??
>
&
Don, tell us how it behaves when you get a chance to use it!
It also has a 58mm filter size where the 35-105 has a 67, so perhaps
flare will be OK.
A puece of information that we find in the Pentax boklet about their
lens line is that to avoid vignetting at 1.5 meters with lens between
60mm and 7
Thanks Andre and Pat.
It's the same weight as, and about an inch longer than the A35-105/3.5
that I love so much so I don't think size or weight are an issue.
It also has a 58mm filter size where the 35-105 has a 67, so perhaps
flare will be OK.
It just struck me as an unusual zoom range, uniquely
It's old, heavy, bulky, and has a fair bit of pincushion distortion at the
long end. Other than that, it's not bad. I used one for years on my MX,
and found it to be a handy zoom range. If its range suits your purposes,
and you can get a good deal, check it out.
Pat White
This seems a great range for the istD and an
excellent companion to the DA 16-45/4.
Don't seem to be many reviews out there.
Has anyone used this lens?
What do you think of it?
TIA
Don
A bit front heavy. One of the best zoom of its time. Good sharpness
and contrast full open, very good afterward
>KEH also appears to be using UPS or FEDex for shipping (as opposed to
>the USPS). I vaguely remember hearing that some people have had some
>problems getting gear across the border (I'm in Canada) via UPS. Can
>anyone confirm or deny?
UPS or FedEx are okay when shipping from US to Canada, if you
At 12:27 PM 09/12/2004 , you wrote:
>KEH also appears to be using UPS or FEDex for shipping (as opposed to
>the USPS). I vaguely remember hearing that some people have had some
>problems getting gear across the border (I'm in Canada) via UPS. Can
>anyone confirm or deny?
Confirm.
Use the postal
These ar e excellent lenses AFAIK!
28-70 F2.6-2.8 TOKINA AT-X PRO
28-70 F2.8 TOKINA ATX PRO II
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Dave Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 9. december 2004 21:27
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne:
oy?
: Dimanche
, Novembre
7, 2004 01:59 PM
>A
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Objet
: RE: Comments on Pentax P3/P3n
>
>I have had several of the P series cameras.
>They're built a bit cheesey and are missing some features
>such as the ability to take a winder.
>They do a fantastic job for th
MAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. november 2004 14:59
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: RE: Comments on Pentax P3/P3n
I have had several of the P series cameras.
They're built a bit cheesey and are missing some fea
I have had several of the P series cameras.
They're built a bit cheesey and are missing some features
such as the ability to take a winder.
They do a fantastic job for the money however and I have
sold several to buyers who are very pleased.
Very comfortable to hold as they have a rubber
grip. Good
Thanks Frank (and all others who commented)
frank said
Golden Gate, by Arnie - I love the Golden Gate Bridge. To me...
Ann,
Comments interspersed:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 04:44:38 -0500, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> annsan sez:
> Frank, I liked it a whole lot as well - and wrote Wendy privately to
> tell her -
> it is the geometry, the light and colors... just a real photographer's
> photo I thin
frank theriault wrote:
> :
> Red Light, by Wendy Beard - I like this one. I don't know why, but I
> do. .
> For whatever reason, I think there's a hell of a lot
> more to this photo than meets the eye. I think this is a great photo,
> Wendy.
annsan sez:
Frank, I liked it a whole lot
Frank mumbled> > Right.
>
> Continuing on, then:
>
> Madawaska River Red by Dave Brooks - I'm a bit of a sucker for these
> sorts of shots - a little forelorn looking red-leaved tree among
> giants. I kind of wish the reds were a bit more vibrant, but oh
Don
It's 77mm.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 14. oktober 2004 00:15
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: RE: Comments on Tokina AT-X 28-70mm F2.8 AF lens?
KEH has three of the
; To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Comments on Tokina AT-X 28-70mm F2.8 AF lens?
>
>
> AFAIR mine is labeled "Pro II" and has largest aperture
> 2.6-2.8/28-70mm. The
> full name is "AT-X 270AF PRO II".
>
> It's an excellent lens. In use mine all the
AFAIR mine is labeled "Pro II" and has largest aperture 2.6-2.8/28-70mm. The
full name is "AT-X 270AF PRO II".
It's an excellent lens. In use mine all the time. I have tested it against
the (IMO underestimated) FA 3.5-4.7/28-80mm power zoom. Only at 50 x
enlargements (slides 1.8m wide) I could act
Wednesday, October 13, 2004, 12:48:22 AM, Don wrote:
DS> Here are the ones that KEH lists:
DS> 28-70 F2.8 TOKINA ATX (72) 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM WIDE ANGLE LENS
DS> 28-70 F2.8 TOKINA ATX PRO (77) 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM WIDE ANGLE LENS
DS> 28-70 F2.8 TOKINA ATX PRO (77) WITH CAPS 35MM SLR AUTO
> To: Don Sanderson
> Subject: Re: Comments on Tokina AT-X 28-70mm F2.8 AF lens?
>
>
> DS> Did you mean 28-80/2.8 in the last one or 28-70/2.8?
> DS> The AT-X "Pro" lenses I've seen in this range are all 28-70.
> DS> KEH lists the 28-70/2.8 72mm and the 28-70/2.8
DS> Did you mean 28-80/2.8 in the last one or 28-70/2.8?
DS> The AT-X "Pro" lenses I've seen in this range are all 28-70.
DS> KEH lists the 28-70/2.8 72mm and the 28-70/2.8 Pro 77mm.
More so - the 28-70/2.8 72mm filter is either a typo or some realy old
version. All the newer ones have 77mm thread
DS> Did you mean 28-80/2.8 in the last one or 28-70/2.8?
DS> The AT-X "Pro" lenses I've seen in this range are all 28-70.
DS> KEH lists the 28-70/2.8 72mm and the 28-70/2.8 Pro 77mm.
I meant (the lens I felt was weaker physically and optically,
but still quite better than any of your variable aper
y, October 12, 2004 9:59 AM
> To: Don Sanderson
> Subject: Re: Comments on Tokina AT-X 28-70mm F2.8 AF lens?
>
>
>
> There are three versions of this...
>
> 1) oldest - 28-70/2.6-2.8, very good build quality, optically
> presumably great
>
> 2) AT-X "SV&
There are three versions of this...
1) oldest - 28-70/2.6-2.8, very good build quality, optically
presumably great
2) AT-X "SV" - cheaper version 28-70/2.8 , less good build quality
(more plastic, not so smooth zooming et cetera, I would rate it
analogous with 19-35/3.5-4.5 or similar), goes new
A great lens, and it's my standard lens. Beware though - it's heavy!
Plus it's a fantastic price.
Maris
Don Sanderson wrote:
> I've seen one of these at $200.00, has anyone had experience with
> this lens? Good? Bad?
i'm disappointed with my FA* 24 f2.0. it is a bit sharper than my FA24-90
but it has a lot more chromatic abberation at the corners. i think mine is
misaligned. it sounds like a trip to Pentax Colorado.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PR
ent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 1:44 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: comments and tips solicited
>
>
> Welcome to the group Guarav, and I obviously you enjoy what you've found
> here: I just hope our comments don't upset you!
> My comments, and I only looked
Welcome to the group Guarav, and I obviously you enjoy what you've found
here: I just hope our comments don't upset you!
My comments, and I only looked at the three showing on the link:
Wah Taj - if you're going to make a building lean by titling the camera, you
might as well go all the way! I am
Hi!
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 09:52:02 +0530
"Gaurav Aggarwal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi everyone,
Don't think twice before sending negative, most
damnest of all remarks (ref: thread on please comments). I would
appreciate if you tell me how to improve the composition, technique,
get better exposur
> I'd say that Sigma at least is trying to do this. Look at some of
> the lenses they offer... [snip] but at least they seem to be
> trying to produce lenses that are not only different from those of
> their competition, but better, too.
Thanks for enlightening me, Chris. I haven't paid as much
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Fred wrote:
> Well, there is still 3rd-party competition, of course, but I think
> that too much of the 3rd-party gear nowadays simply represents "less
> expensive versions" of camera makers' lenses. This is not to say that
> there is not a need for good alternative economica
> Thanks Fred! Interesting reading, you never cease to amaze me
> with the data you have!
It's too bad, though, that I ~do~ cease to amaze people with the
knowledge I actually have... ;-) I think that I fit your signature
line, Steve, pretty darn well - "Everyone has a photographic memory.
Some
>> By the way, I have an old magazine ad featuring this lens, so I'll
>> have to scan it and put it on my site. Stay tuned...
>
> I`m looking forward to the scans Fred!
Here you go, Steve -
Ad from Modern Photography (Jan., 1975) -
http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v13523/v13523ad7501mp.jpg
VS1
I never said the single coated is a half stop faster. I`m just going by what
I saw, both cameras pointed at the same subject, standing side by
side. You are correct that it could be meter fluctuations, I know my
meter is dead on,
and I bet Shel`s was too. My 135/2.3 was a K mount multi coated ver
version.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
"Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film."
- Original Message -
From: "Andre Langevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 6:40 PM
Subject:
I say it might be a little
faster than rated because I was shooting side by side with Shel, we
were both using LXae, 100 speed film, I was using the 135/2.3,
he was using the renowned 85/1.8 (wish I had one), it was a dark
and gloomy day and we were both wide open.
Shooting EXACTLY the same scene
Stregevsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Pentax-Discuss'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: comments wanted on the vivitar S1 135mm 2.3
> Steve Larson wrote:
> > It is probably actually a little faster than 2.3.
>
&g
Steve Larson wrote:
It is probably actually a little faster than 2.3.
Steve may be basing this statement on a test that I conducted with my older,
single-coated Vivitar 135/2.3 in M42 mount. Compared to my SMC 135/2.5K, it
delivered about a half-stop faster shutter speed at every aperture.
I h
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo
