Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On 1/7/2016 1:31 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Bill wrote: On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all.

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

Bill wrote: On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. I played with the 90mm somewhat before

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

This sounds like the people who don't like Howard Stern but tend to listen to him more than his fans. The reason given? To hear what he'll say next.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G6xu-J_Dmc If you don't like him, why are you reading his site? On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:24 AM, P.J. Alling

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

As I said he's knowledgeable. Sometimes he has good information. Sometimes he passes his opinion as fact. The dismissal of the 135 aov just annoyed me, and his I dismissed his dismissive review. I have plenty of opinions of my own, I just don't expect people to pay to hear them. On

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

when i moved up from the box camera to the SP500 i had a 55 and a 105 prime Loved the 105 but never bought the 135. Dave On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:49 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > As I said he's knowledgeable. Sometimes he has good information. Sometimes > he passes his

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

But that's the thing, I have collected 85, 100 135 and 150mm lenses and used them all. When you jump from 85 to 150 in the same session you might notice but changing from 85 to 100 or 135 to 150, really doesn't make that much difference. The last of those lenses I got was the 135, and really

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On 2016-01-06 7:49 , P.J. Alling wrote: I have plenty of opinions of my own, I just don't expect people to pay to hear them. you can pay if you *really really* want to support the site (and get no ads), but the content is not infused with any expectation of payment; i read it in my RSS

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On 1/6/2016 9:34 PM, Bill wrote: On 1/6/2016 1:02 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: But that's the thing, I have collected 85, 100 135 and 150mm lenses and used them all. When you jump from 85 to 150 in the same session you might notice but changing from 85 to 100 or 135 to 150, really doesn't make that

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On 1/6/2016 9:08 AM, David J Brooks wrote: when i moved up from the box camera to the SP500 i had a 55 and a 105 prime Loved the 105 but never bought the 135. The same. One of my favorite lenses on the present Pentax format is the 70mm. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On 1/6/2016 1:02 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: But that's the thing, I have collected 85, 100 135 and 150mm lenses and used them all. When you jump from 85 to 150 in the same session you might notice but changing from 85 to 100 or 135 to 150, really doesn't make that much difference. The last of

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016, at 01:49 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > As I said he's knowledgeable. Sometimes he has good information. > Sometimes he passes his opinion as fact. > > The dismissal of the 135 aov just annoyed me, and his I dismissed his > dismissive review. > > I have plenty of opinions of my

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On 1/3/2016 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. Should we send him cat photos to cheer him up?

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. > > FUJI has a new 90mm

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

No, he's saying he doesn't like that focal length so there's no real reason to make it. Everything else is window dressing. First off, Fuji is producing a very nice system of "retro" cameras. I expect that they will sell enough of that lens to justify manufacturing them. Secondly, well,

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

David Parsons wrote: >No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually >use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. And he's saying it on his own blog which no one is actually obligated to read if they don't want to. >On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM,

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

His reaction would certainly cheer me up. On 1/5/2016 1:53 AM, John wrote: On 1/3/2016 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. I played with the 90mm somewhat before it was

Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016, at 02:38 PM, Bill wrote: > On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > > I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. > > > > FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see > > any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. > >

OT: Meanwhile at TOP.

I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality