Mike Johnston writes:
--Mike, Lens and Camera Purchase Enabling and Justification Service
Don't worry Mike, once she uses it I'm sure it won't need any justification.
And if she doesn't like it, it won't cost much to ship my way :)
I got some enlargements back today from my new A*85/1.4.
Dave O'Brien writes:
Of course, given that Pentax tend to use 'Professional' to refer to
their MedFormat gear, it could well be a P67 III with OTF metering,
1/4000 shutter speed and 1/250 flash sync[1].
[...]
[1] Probably the only way they could do that would be to have an LCD
shutter,
Michel Adam writes:
Still an OK price (actually, quite good!).
It's a marginally more than I paid for mine but I think that one's in slightly
better condition. If I remember right, the BH new price is about US$1,500.
If I didn't have one already I'd be seriously considering this one...
A scroll of mail from David A. Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun,
22 Jul 2001 18:18:42 +1200
Read it? y
You could use a leaf shutter lens.
Hmmm, how about a focal plane leaf shutter. Is that possible?
Or a shutter so beefy the tripod would
literally jump off the ground when you tripped it :)
Hi,
The rather quaint notion that you buy something once and never buy a
similar device for the rest of you life arose out of 19th century and
prior technology where things just plain didn't change fast enough to
warrant being replaced in one lifetime. That logic was obsolete in the
dave o'brien writes:
Hmmm, how about a focal plane leaf shutter. Is that possible?
I don't see why not but the bigger they get the slower they are. Something
that'd cover the focal plane at 6x7 would probably be slower than a focal plane
shutter (and you'd lose your higher-than-sync
Nah, It's Richard Starkey.
Ray Allen. Sydney. Australia.
Check out Spotmatic at Yahoo!Groups at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/spotmatic
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: Funny
Hi,
I'm after a 35mm lense, i cant really extend the finances to the 35/2 at the
moment, if i find i like the focal length then i'll get one later on
So getting to the point, whats out there in the 35mm focal length? i'm not
fussed if it is a pentax brand lense or not and the speed doesnt
The MZ-S has been on sale in the UK for a couple of weeks now, and there are
three reviews (at least) in the popular photography magazines.
Unfortunately, this seems to have passed Pentax UK by. Looking at their
website this morning, there is no mention whatsoever of the camera. As far
as they
In a message dated 7/21/01 8:04:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Subj: RE: Semi-OT: Pickpockets oops.
Date: 7/21/01 8:04:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Amita Guha)
Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: A HREF=mailto:[EMAIL
Hi,
And why not the SMC FA 80-200/4,7-5,6? Pretty good stuff. And for the same
reason as stated below I would't recommend the Tamron 70-300. IMHO it's
unacceptably soft at longer end - over 200 mm - so there's no reason to pay
for that additional 100mm if one never uses it because of poor
In a message dated 7/21/01 8:05:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Subj: Re: More Tripod Follies?
Date: 7/21/01 8:05:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shel Belinkoff)
Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: A HREF=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED];[EMAIL
Strange thing: in Poland, where potential market for MZ-S is
extremely slim (Pentax is not a popular brand here; MZ-S is too
expensive for amateurs and pros rather choose Canons or Nikons), the
company which now represents Pentax placed MZ-S advertisements in
photographic magazines
Jarek
Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa / wrote:
Shel wrote:
Early Pentax had shutters that were good for about 50,000
cycles, later models, like the Spotmatic, bumped that up to
about 100,000 cycles. "Pro" cameras seem to be in the 150,000
cycle range. Where does the MZ-S fall?
I
Beacuse it doesn't work that way: MX was just a name like KX, K2 or
ME whereas LX was chosen deliberately to mark Pentax anniversary
Jarek
petit miam [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa / wrote:
Never thought of it that way:
So the LX is 60, MX is ?510 or ?1010, but then P1-zp
and Spotmatic don't
A scroll of mail from David A. Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun,
22 Jul 2001 21:21:49 +1200
Read it? y
It's almost square but not quite :) Have you ever tried tilting a medium format
camera 90 degrees on a tripod? My Manfrotto 055 will barely stand up with
my RB67 tilted over.
I tried it a few
Well, Ken, combining photography and cycling would bring together two of
my passions. If I start planning now...
Thanks for the offer. Maybe this time next year, I'll get to meet some
American Pentax brothers and sisters!
regards,
frank
Ken Archer wrote:
Make it Texas and we'll show some
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:18:42 +1200, David A. Mann wrote:
I've yet to see what the imprinting actually looks like. Is anyone with an MZ-S
able to scan the sprocket area?
I put up a scan of it that I found somewere:
http://www.fsys.demon.nl/gallery/mz-s-data-imprint.htm
It is about
In a message dated 7/21/01 8:21:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Optimist. No debate ever gets finished here. Arguments just get
recycled.
So true.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the
Like a camera, the more you use it the more effiencient you become with it.
You don't miss as much as you think.
In a message dated 7/21/01 1:09:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, even when being deliberate, you'll deliberately create high
resolution crap if the
The SMCP K35/3.5 is an excellent - some say superb - lens, and
it's inexpensive. Don't waste your time and money on 3rd
party lenses.
Paul Jones wrote:
I'm after a 35mm lense [...]
So getting to the point, whats out there in the 35mm focal length? i'm not
fussed if it is a pentax brand
You can always keep an eye out for the K 35 F3.5. It's slow, but optically
it's right up there with the FA 35mm F2. They tend to go for $100, if you
can find one. They seem to be somewhat rare, or their current owners
simply aren't giving them up.
Todd
At 08:03 PM 7/22/01 +1000, you wrote:
ME stands for Miniature Electronic. I don't have a clue to the MX (or MG,
MV). Also, with the K2 being the top camera in the K series, I have always
wondered if there was a K1 that got shelved.
Todd
At 01:26 PM 7/22/01 +0200, you wrote:
Beacuse it doesn't work that way: MX was just a name
Well, there was a screw mount K ...
Todd Stanley wrote:
Also, with the K2 being the top camera in the K series, I have always
wondered if there was a K1 that got shelved.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It matters little how much equipment we use; it
matters much that we be
Shel B. wrote:
I don't subscribe to that logic. I like things that last, and
that I can use and take pleasure in for the rest of my life.
It's comfortable, it's convenient, it saves money, it saves
time. I like things of substance, and that have a timeless
quality about them. That's not
In eons past, ancient forests fell and were gathered together and covered by
waters and with silt by the waters. As the ages passed, the silt became
stone, the waters abated, and new vegetation covered a new land. Finally, in
this new age, we've drilled down into those ancient forests and now
Don't worry Mike, once she uses it I'm sure it won't need any
justification.
And if she doesn't like it, it won't cost much to ship my way :)
Ack! I don't need any encouragement! I'm just about to get out
of credit card debt and I'm unemployed, so I'm trying REALLY
hard not to bid on this
If I'm not working whatever day you're on GFM, I'll see you there
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hey, I didn't go to the one a few months back, took a trip to Costa Rica
to shoot with Roberto Burgos instead.
Looks like when I drop my daughter off at college at the end of august,
I'll be
Mike Johnston wrote:
I agree. I'm drinking coffee right now out
of a mug that I bought at a Shaker Village
in Kentucky when I was 9. I tend to get
attached to things.
I have to laugh - I've got a mug that's about 20 years old
which I dearly love. It was hand made, and part of a matched
I apologize for coming on so strong at that point - somewhere I slipped
past ranting into raving... But the point remains that technology moves
on, so why invest the energy and resources to build something to last 50
years, when it will be obsolete in 10?
A few weeks ago I spent some time
At 06:18 PM 7/22/01 +1200, David Mann wrote:
I have yet to see if the switches are subject to being knocked out of
place.
My first reaction to those little switches was how long until they
break off?. I
also wonder how awkward this body would be to use with gloves on. The Z-1p
is
I have the A 35mm f2.8 and would recommend against it. As others (Pal, I
think) have noted, it never seems to get sharp at any aperture.
- MCC
At 08:03 PM 7/22/01 +1000, you wrote:
Hi,
I'm after a 35mm lense, i cant really extend the finances to the 35/2 at the
moment, if i find i like the
Mike Johnston wrote:
Back on topic, cameras are fun to collect simply because older ones were
made so nicely. Many of them are beautiful and can still be used today.
Agree. I have a Rollei TLR my father passed on to me back in about 1955,
after he had used it for many years. Of no interest
There's much ado about lenses. even entire websites dedicated to
comparing the quality of lenses just within the Pentax family.
My question is.
How's the list rate my Cosmicar A-70~200 1:4 Macro???
It was just the other day (after 14 yrs) that I learned Cosmicar Pentax
are
Look here.
http://www.geocities.com/belshop/index.html
And be shocked.
Regards,
Mordazy.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
THE ONLY THING WORTH WAITING FOR
IS A WORLD-WIDE DISASTER.
--
Znudzilo Ci sie logo w komorce?
Wgraj
Hi Mark,
No apology needed.
I agree that some things (like the steam hoist you mentioned)
become obsolete and outlive their usefulness. However, some
things don't become obsolete - they are just improved upon
by new models with bells and whistles, but remain 100% capable
and functional.
Dmitry wrote about the Sigma 70-300 zooms...
I thought I had read where the Sigma 70-300 APO had a better rating than the
DL, but regardless, I bought the APO version for my wife as she is
interested in birds and nature shots. She has been very happy with it and I
looked at some hand held
I am shocked! At that price, can it possibly be any good? Anyone here
used or heard of this lens?
And it's M42, too!
regards,
frank
Tomasz Holdowanski wrote:
Look here.
http://www.geocities.com/belshop/index.html
And be shocked.
Regards,
Mordazy.
Alexander wrote:
A new 50th anniversary LX flagship does make perfect sense.
The 50th anniversary of the Asahiflex is a major event. The Asahiflex was the first
japanese slr and a Pentax as well. They would be stupid if they didn't take any
advantage of the fact.
50 is L in roman
I was thinking about this statement while taking a shower:
170 year old steam hoist encased in a poured
concrete building with windows made of quartz, and realize it sat
unattended for over a century and is still basically functional. But it
also was a big waste of effort and resources
I'm selling some stuff and thought I would offer it here first before
putting it on eBay. If anybody is interested in anything, please contact me
off-list. Thanks.
--Mike
For Sale
Nikon EL2 Black, Ex, very slight ding on prism, foam seals need replacing
soon, a nice one, $129
Nikon 50/2
You can always keep an eye out for the K 35 F3.5. It's slow, but optically
it's right up there with the FA 35mm F2. They tend to go for $100, if you
can find one
As much as that? I was figuring around GBP40-45. Have to put the prices up..
Kind regards
Peter
-
This message is from the
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:29:42 -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I believe that preservation of the past, through buildings,
and the objects we use on a daily basis, whether currently
useful or obsolete, are an important part of our culture and
heritage. By making everything disposable, and planning
Hi!
Yet another lens question.
I wanted to buy 50 f/1.4 AF lens. After checking with Bojidar's web site it
looks like F version of this lens has better focusing ring.
Is that right? Is It the only difference? (It seems that they are identical
optically).
Since then, I'm yet to see one on eBay
Hi Kieth,
Went through your web-site. Pretty impressive.
Do keep posted whenever you make any additions/changes.
Thanks
Anand.
From: Keith Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: My wonderful day, sort of OT
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001
Hi Kieth,
Went through your web-site. Pretty impressive.
Do keep posted whenever you make any additions/changes.
Thanks
Anand.
From: Keith Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: My wonderful day, sort of OT
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001
Interesting things Glenn,
Keen to see the photos - whenever you get those back.
From: D. Glenn Arthur Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Aching Shoulders
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:20:12 -0400 (EDT)
Today I went to listen and photograph a friend's
Yah, that's what everyone on this list seems to think. What I
want to know is how it marks the 60th anniversary, and now they
are talking about an autofocus LX to mark the 50th anniverseary
twenty years latter. Someone's full of BS somewhere.
--Tom
Jaros³aw Brzeziñski wrote:
Beacuse it
Mark C. wrote:
Seagulls.
:-)
LOL!
Best Comeback of the Week Award, Mark. That's funny.
--Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at
on 7/22/01 2:36 PM, pentax-discuss-digest at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Look here.
http://www.geocities.com/belshop/index.html
And be shocked.
Regards,
Mordazy.
Cool. Looks like it would be a lot of fun to play around with.
I once worked for a magazine that spent $6,000 to buy a
Hey folks, it looks like there's about a 90% chance that I'm going to be one
of the presenters at the Camera Clinic at Grandfather Mountain in August.
Hope to meet some of you there. BRING PICTURES!! g
--Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
At 08:40 AM 7/22/01 -0700, Shel wrote:
I agree that some things (like the steam hoist
you mentioned)
become obsolete and outlive their usefulness. However, some
things don't become obsolete - they are just improved
upon
by new models with bells and whistles, but remain 100% capable
and
At 09:29 AM 7/22/01 -0700, Shel wrote:
I was thinking about this statement while
taking a shower:
170 year old steam hoist encased in a poured
concrete building with windows made of quartz, and realize it sat
unattended for over a century and is still basically
functional. But it
also
Thanks for your report Glenn, nice reading.
The atmosphere and the circumstances are familiar.
D. Glenn A. wrote:
I think this
is the first time I've used a focal length wider than 50mm
shooting a concert.
I have had some fun and nice shots shooting with my Cosina 19-35 zoom at it's wide
Hi,
60th anniversary of Pentax in the 1980s, 50th anniversary of the
Asahiflex in 2002.
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sunday, July 22, 2001, 11:06:06 PM, you wrote:
Yah, that's what everyone on this list seems to think. What I
want to know is how it marks the 60th anniversary, and
I've heard people say the FA lens has a better focus ring. But if you are
going to be focusing manually, why not get the A version? - it's the same
optically.
Todd
At 05:03 PM 7/22/01 -0400, you wrote:
Hi!
Yet another lens question.
I wanted to buy 50 f/1.4 AF lens. After checking with
Tom wrote:
Yah, that's what everyone on this list seems to think. What I
want to know is how it marks the 60th anniversary, and now they
are talking about an autofocus LX to mark the 50th anniverseary
twenty years latter. Someone's full of BS somewhere.
The LX name was choosen to
Whoops, sorry, should have clarified--that NEXT year I'll be at Grandfather
Mt.
Aug. 2002.
See ya,
--Calendar-challenged Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users'
Hi,
Romans, Mayans, Incas, Egyptians, [...]. The economies of those societies were
fueled by forceably stealing resources from neighboring peoples, enslaving
them, and forcing the majority to attend to every whim of the
minority.
Same thing applies here and now.
They operated at a
On July 22, 2001 Shel Belinkoff wrote:
snip
Supermarkets around
here offer a choice of bags - paper or plastic. Both have
their pros and cons. Do we lose a tree or contribute to
chemical pollution.
I asked for both, usually. They secure the grocery better and provide a good
trash bag later.
Hi,
Ok i think i'll search around for a K35/3.5, sounds like the best option.
Maybe a cheap 35/2 will turn up.
Thanks for all your replys.
Paul
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: K mount
Maybe this has been posted, but I just found it, so I'll share. It
explains the e-film principals pretty well. I still don't know if it's
really actually available.
http://www.e-insite.net/ednmag/index.asp?layout=articlearticleId=CA9076
1
Thanks,
Ed
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
Hi!
From: Todd Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've heard people say the FA lens has a better focus ring. But if you are
going to be focusing manually, why not get the A version? - it's the same
optically.
Hmm... I based my opinion strictly on small photos on Boz's site. g
There is an obvious
hmmm, it looks like it needs a lot more development. Only 1.3 Megapixels,
only 100iso and 2sec delay between shots. Still it could be a useful tool,
to take test shots or similar.
Cya
- Original Message -
From: Ed Mathews [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 23,
- Original Message -
From: Ernest Alejandria [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
All I know is that the tree-huggers are the most laughably obnoxious
people
that ever walked the face of the earth.
I thought
Regarding Pal's post speculating on an updated LX, my ideal Pentax flagship
would be a PZ-1p built like an LX, with OTF and a modern multi-point AF, a
better MLU and some of the goodies found on the MZ-S. Pentax can then
designate this as the *PL* for Pentax 50th anniversary.
In reality
I bought the 19-35 for a trip recently. It's quite a good
lens for the money, delivers some good results. It's sharp and
contrasy, but in outdoor shots I had some problems with flare.
- MCC
At 03:09 AM 7/23/01 +0930, you wrote:
Hi
Has anybody on this list used either of the following Vivitar
Hello Mark,
I have been visiting your web-site for quite some time and appreciate the
photographs - bird photographs you have taken. I also read all the essays
you have written - explaining your techniques.
What I am very keen is the snowflakes you have photographed. I want to try
it this
I'm not the moderator, nor the censor of any list. I would, however, suggest
that you exercise restraint and keep your political opinions off the list.
After almost three years on this list I've learned to curb myself (at least
somewhat). I do this because at 54, I've decided to grow up.
If you
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:23:52 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote:
One thing to keep in mind here is back when things were made with such high
quality, the cost of labor versus materials was different. Labor was quite
cheap and materials were more expensive. The opposite is true now. I
recall in the
If hardware is cheap, it's because it's being made in Thailand, like my Canon
printer, or China, like my Umax scanner, by workers making about $1 per day.
There is no such thing a cheap material, imho. Only cheap labour to extract,
process and manufacture it (and still allow the coporation to
I worked in a retail camera store in 1965 the Pentax Spotmatic w/50/1.4
case sold for $307.00...what would that convert to in todays dollars? Must
be a web site with that type info somewhere.
jfd
At 08:13 PM 07/22/2001 -0500, you wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:23:52 -0700, Bruce Dayton
See below.
Whats constitutes an LX is built, sealing,
interchangeable viewfinders and motor drives, OTF
metering, large mirror and large viewfinder
coverage, true mirror lock, batteryless operation
and reasonable compact measurements.
And manual focus. I don't see how you can have an LX
Okay then, look forward to meeting you next year
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whoops, sorry, should have clarified--that NEXT year I'll be at
Grandfather
Mt.
Aug. 2002.
See ya,
--Calendar-challenged Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
Hello Paal and all,
I've also read the article in the famous photo magazine
called Asahi Camera. (It's published by a major
newspaper company called Asahi Shimbun. There is nothing
to do with Asahi Optical, FYI.)
Well, I don't want to pour cold water above you all, but I
think I'm very
Great! Looking forward to meeting you and seeing your work.
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hey folks, it looks like there's about a 90% chance that I'm going to be
one
of the presenters at the Camera Clinic at Grandfather Mountain in August.
Hope to meet some of you there. BRING PICTURES!!
Hi,
I'm just going to do a me too pretty much on what
Todd said. I had the Vivitar 19/3.8 for about 9
years, and never made a photo with it that I cared to
enlarge to 8x10. Actually, sharpness was ok in the
center on mine wide open, if you could find a scene
that had little chance of ANY
At 12:11 AM 7/21/2001 -0700, Shel wrote:
tom wrote:
01:15 - wonder if Shel smells like feet all the time too.
Ha! That gave me a good chuckle. For a few days I smelled
My first test shows Pentax 50mm lenses to be as sharp as my
Leica 50mm lenses. Why does this trouble me? Perhaps I
At 08:41 PM 7/21/2001 -0400, you wrote:
petit miam wrote:
Wow, so you two finally got your act together.
Congratulations. Isn't it you that should be rushing,
Tom? You know the bride is allowed/expected to be
late.
Alas, Jeepgirl knew I wasn't the one for her when she saw my Jetta.
There is this:
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
According to them, the Spotmatic with 50mm F1.4 would cost $1647.08 in 2000
just from inflation - which makes the MZ-S a bargain. Likewise, the ZX-M,
available without a lens for $159 today, would cost a little less than $30
in 1965 dollars.
You see these on e-bay every once in a while. Most of these Russian lenses
are
relatively good preformers, (especially considering the price) and based on
the ones I've
handled are well built, (glass and brass, ok maybe not brass but some kind
of metal), also
considering the price.
I think
I looked for the K35/3.5 for quite a while before I
gave up and got a Super Takumar 35/3.5 (optically the
same) for a song. It's ok to focus on the go down
to f/5.6, which is about as far as I'll normally stop
down anyway, unless I'm shooting a landscape, at which
point the manual diaphram isn't
So after a bad experience at the Used department at BH,
I headed down to Adorama, where a very nice guy sold me
a new Tokina 28mm f2.8. It has an autofocus mode. I've
never used an AF lens before, since my K1000 doesn't
need it. That said, I had a heck of a time getting
the aperture ring to
Congratulations on joining the LX brigade. Now you can look down your nose
at all
of the owners of camera lesser cameras, (that's just about everyone).
At 07:13 PM 7/20/2001 -0700, petit miam wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?MfcISAPICommand=ViewItemitem=1255311711
Don't know if
Hear Hear Shel
At 08:47 PM 7/21/2001 -0700, you wrote:
Mark said:
The rather quaint notion that you buy
something once and never buy a similar
device for the rest of you life arose
out of 19th century and prior technology
where things just plain didn't change fast
enough to warrant
Greetings all,
Are the viewing screens of older Pentaxes significantly darker than those in
newer bodies (specifically the ZX/MZ series)?
I was looking for a long prime lens and thought I'd try a screwmount.A
saleman showed me a third party 400mm f/6.9; quite a bit slower than I would
It's a hard lens to find, I haven't seen any for sale for a while. So that
brings us back to the original question: With the F2.0 Pentaxes cositng
too much, and the F2.8 Pentaxes stink, and the sole F3.5 is rare, are there
any good, inexpensive, 3rd party 35mm lenses out there? (or should I
87 matches
Mail list logo
