I bought last fall from a list member, the K 400 f5.6. It was in rough condition, but the glass etc is good.Manual Focus. However if i can find an A or AF i might part with it.
My only tests with it are a few shots of a broken down dock at a pond edge, using the istD and some Iflord B&W HP5 film. It looks ok from the digital end, but not to sure about film. Not as sharp and flat, BUT it could have been the film or my proccessing of it. I don't seem to do a good job on HP5 as its always grey looking.I gave up on my wet print of the subject. I have tried my Sigma 300 f4 with 1.4 tele, and that was semi successful(shot a hawk from the car) I have not tried my 50-200 or 70-210 for birds yet. I didi try my Sigma 170-500 Nikon mount for some ducks. Results were ok, but not tack sharp as one would suspect. Colours were good. dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Russell Kerstetter" Subject: Re: long lens for birds? > The Tokina 400/5.6 in good condition goes for around $150 then? Is > this MF or AF? > > Also, about how much should I expect to pay for an A400/5.6? And > also, also.... for either of these lens' are there different versions > that should not be purchased? >Then WW said. I can't help you on price, that seems really variable, depending on patience and luck. I seem able to buy something off ebay and then see three auctions in the next month end for less than I paid. Anyway, I have both an A400/5.6 and a Tokina SD 400/5.6 (it's a manual focus, contemporaneous with the A400/5.6). The Pentax is definitely the better lens, I recall the Tokina had a bit of chromatic abberation, the Pentax is nice, with a very crisp image. The CA doesn't seem to show up on film, or at least not as obviously, but does show on the digital. William Robb David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
