RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Stanley Halpin wrote: > If you aren’t going to use it, maybe you should send it back? Where are > your priorities?!? Exactly where my wife left them! Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On 10/31/2015 12:06 AM, Larry Colen wrote: David Mann wrote: On Oct 30, 2015, at 9:24 PM, Malcolm Smith wrote: The next issue I have is more about acquiring skills than equipment But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! It has worked for me for

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

David Mann wrote: > But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! *Sigh!* If only Anyway, many thanks for your replies. I can report a rather nice parcel has arrived with a 16-85mm WR lens. As is the way of things, I'm now in and out of the house doing family jobs until tomorrow night,

RE: Fighting Enablement - Lens Choice Question

Bipin Gupta wrote: > Congratulations Malcom, You now have an excellent lens in the 16-85 WR, > that Ricoh-Pentax could have labelled "STAR". > > I am glad that I had pointed you out to this lens as your first choice. > Suggest you check it out thoroughly as some manufacturing defects have > been

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

> On Oct 31, 2015, at 4:17 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > > David Mann wrote: > >> But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! > > *Sigh!* If only > > Anyway, many thanks for your replies. I can report a rather nice parcel has > arrived with a 16-85mm WR lens.

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Boris Liberman wrote: > Malcolm, > > Sorry to join late... > > If you *absolutely* have to have WR lens, then I think that 16-85 is > preferable. The difference between 18 and 16 mm on wide end is > significant. It will give you more interesting compositional > opportunities. The difference

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Igor wrote: > Malcolm, > > I haven't used any of these lenses, but I was thinking about a similar > question. > Just in case you haven't seen this review, - it might give you some > impression of this lens, and answer some technical questions, including > some comparisons between different

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Boris Liberman wrote: Igor, personally I translate "limited" designation into "unusual and therefore costly". And the "*" designation to "professional and hence expensive". While wikipedia is not a definitive source, it can still be valuable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_(lens) FA

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

I think Limited has more to do with build quality than optical excellence. Don't get me wrong, I love the 43mm limited, and I love it's optical characteristics, but honestly the FA 20-35mm is easily as sharp at f4.0 it's maximum aperture, and has just as pleasing a rendition under most

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On Oct 30, 2015, at 9:24 PM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > The next issue I have is more about acquiring skills than equipment But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

David Mann wrote: On Oct 30, 2015, at 9:24 PM, Malcolm Smith wrote: The next issue I have is more about acquiring skills than equipment But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! It has worked for me for years. Cheers, Dave -- Larry Colen

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Bipin Gupta wrote: > Hello Malcom, choice of lenses have always been the most difficult > decision for most of us. So how do we finally decide. > Ask simple rational question like: > a) Genre of photography > b) Predominantly wide or tele user. > c) Bright or Low Light photography > d)

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Clearly you need to purchase both. :) On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > Brian Walters wrote: > >> I have the 18-135 and it's become my most used lens. My 16-45 has got >> very little use since I got the 18-135. Maybe my IQ standards are not >> as

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Darren Addy wrote: > Clearly you need to purchase both. > :) Aaah!! You mustn't make comments like that! Horrifying thought :-) Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

While it is not weather sealed, the Tamron 18-250 is a surprisingly sharp lens. It's the lens equivalent of what motorcyclists call a UJM. It's not swimmingly good at any one thing, but does almost everything well enough. On October 29, 2015 10:01:37 AM PDT, Malcolm Smith

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm, I haven't used any of these lenses, but I was thinking about a similar question. Just in case you haven't seen this review, - it might give you some impression of this lens, and answer some technical questions, including some comparisons between different lenses in this range:

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Alan, I don't know if it was just a rhetorical question or not. Until recently, I had thought that "Limited" designation was limited [sic!] to primes lenses. And for the "*" designation zooms had to have constant aperture and be parfocal (as opposed to varifocal). (Of course, those criteria

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Darren Addy wrote: > Rereading your original post... > I like to look at my lens line-up as a "team" that I am constantly > working to upgrade, sometimes in incremental ways. > What you are describing gives you the opportunity to upgrade yours: > The 18-55mm you have is essentially just a kit

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Brian Walters wrote: > I have the 18-135 and it's become my most used lens. My 16-45 has got > very little use since I got the 18-135. Maybe my IQ standards are not > as stringent as those of other people but I have absolutely no problem > with the lens. > > Having said that, reviews suggest

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

pdml.net Subject: Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question Alan, I don't know if it was just a rhetorical question or not. Until recently, I had thought that "Limited" designation was limited [sic!] to primes lenses. And for the "*" designation zooms had to have constant

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm, Sorry to join late... If you *absolutely* have to have WR lens, then I think that 16-85 is preferable. The difference between 18 and 16 mm on wide end is significant. It will give you more interesting compositional opportunities. The difference between 85 and 135 mm on the long end

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Igor, personally I translate "limited" designation into "unusual and therefore costly". And the "*" designation to "professional and hence expensive". Boris On 10/29/2015 22:57, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Alan, I don't know if it was just a rhetorical question or not. Until recently, I had

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Brian Walters wrote: > I have the 18-135 and it's become my most used lens. the same is true for me. It is very versatile and convenient, and produces good results. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- PDML

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

how it missed "limited" or "*" status. Alan C -Original Message- From: Darren Addy Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:32 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question Rereading your original post... I like to look at my

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm Smith wrote: I have the opportunity to add either an 18-135mm WR lens, or a 16-85mm WR lens to my collection at a discount. In the past I would have jumped to add another lens, but as I already have the 18-55mm WR& 55-300mm WR lenses, I am struggling to see what advantage I would

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Larry Colen wrote: > I'm quite interested in hearing about the relative merits and drawbacks > of all of the weather sealed lenses, as my 16-50 is my only lens in > that category. I don't generally worry too much about taking equipment out in poor conditions, WR or not, but on one occasion I got

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

P.J. Alling wrote: > From what I understand the 18-85 WR is a superior lens of it's type in > every way, except manual focusing, in that respect it takes after the > FA 17-70, which gives all the tactile feedback of a, I was going to say > dead fish, but that actually give tactile feedback, the

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Darren Addy wrote: > I'm not sure where the "discount" is coming from, or how much of a > discount it is, but if it is sizeable enough that you could turn around > and sell the lens and make a profit - it would be worth doing just for > the "free money" aspect of it. In that case, I would look

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

I'm not sure where the "discount" is coming from, or how much of a discount it is, but if it is sizeable enough that you could turn around and sell the lens and make a profit - it would be worth doing just for the "free money" aspect of it. In that case, I would look at what NEW ones are selling

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

From what I understand the 18-85 WR is a superior lens of it's type in every way, except manual focusing, in that respect it takes after the FA 17-70, which gives all the tactile feedback of a, I was going to say dead fish, but that actually give tactile feedback, the 17-70 reportedly gives

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm Smith wrote: Larry Colen wrote: As my little part of the world is now getting regular rain again - and torrential it was this morning, with the end of my garden still flooded - a I envy you. We are now getting sporadic rain, which is a definite improvement, with a bit of

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015, at 08:29 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > I have the opportunity to add either an 18-135mm WR lens, or a 16-85mm WR > lens to my collection at a discount. > > In the past I would have jumped to add another lens, but as I already > have > the 18-55mm WR & 55-300mm WR lenses, I am

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Rereading your original post... I like to look at my lens line-up as a "team" that I am constantly working to upgrade, sometimes in incremental ways. What you are describing gives you the opportunity to upgrade yours: The 18-55mm you have is essentially just a kit lens with WR. The 16-85mm is a