Super Takumar doesn't count, but the SMC Takumar screwmount 135/2.5
I've not seen.
Send a picture...
Regards, Bob S.
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote:
I've never seen a
My guess is that among camera bodies the Pentax LX would probably be a
contender for King of Silent Upgrades.
On 7/25/2013 10:45 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
Roger Cicala of lensrentals.com talks about silent lens upgrades and
makes a few snarky comments about the blogosphere along the way:
Doesn't solve that problem. Now they just call you or email you with the same
crap!
Need your carpets cleaned?
I'm thinking of getting another phone line/number that is auto forwarded to the
caller ID of any incoming calls.
Placing your number on the the Do Not Call list the FCC runs does
Roger Cicala of lensrentals.com talks about silent lens upgrades and
makes a few snarky comments about the blogosphere along the way:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/07/silent-changes
(Figured this was only semi-OT given the recent discussion about lens
differences.)
--
Hugs and backrubs
Had to Google those two acronyms:
Two of the common languages spoken on forums are CAKWAF (Complete,
Absolute Knowledge Without Any Facts) and AFIDAWAB (Any Facts I Don’t
Agree With Are Bullstuff).
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote:
Roger Cicala of lensrentals.com
Interesting article, thanks for the link.
It would seem that the optical change in the Super-Multi-Coated 135mm
f2.5 from version 1 (5 elements in 4 groups) to version 2 (6 elements
in 6 groups), the same optical design that was carried over to the
first SMC K version) was an example of a silent
Thanks for the pointer, Aahz.
If I read net comments much I really fear for humanity's future. Read
them too much and I start to root for humanity's demise.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote:
Roger Cicala of lensrentals.com talks about silent lens upgrades and
Yes, but /we/ know.
On 7/25/2013 11:12 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
Interesting article, thanks for the link.
It would seem that the optical change in the Super-Multi-Coated 135mm
f2.5 from version 1 (5 elements in 4 groups) to version 2 (6 elements
in 6 groups), the same optical design that was
On Jul 25, 2013, at 10:16 , Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the pointer, Aahz.
If I read net comments much I really fear for humanity's future. Read
them too much and I start to root for humanity's demise.
Mark! Oh, Mark!
-Charles
--
Charles Robinson -
I loved this part:
Responses claimed with absolute certainty there were laws that
prevented any changes once a lens was released unless they were
announced . . .
Reminds me of the kid in sixth grade who settled every argument with,
you can't do that, it's state law!
-- Walt
On 7/25/2013
While attending College in Rhode Island, I used to approach people who
were wearing a t-shirt with an out of state attraction, and say matter
of factly You do know that under General Law paragraph X, wearing
apparel that advertised an out of state attraction, or scenic wonder,
was
Walt wrote:
I loved this part:
Responses claimed with absolute certainty there were laws that
prevented any changes once a lens was released unless they were
announced . . .
Reminds me of the kid in sixth grade who settled every argument with,
you can't do that, it's state law!
Might be the
You probably could have gotten 100% compliance had you been carrying a
clipboard.
-- Walt
On 7/25/2013 11:51 AM, P.J. Alling wrote:
While attending College in Rhode Island, I used to approach people who
were wearing a t-shirt with an out of state attraction, and say matter
of factly You do
On 7/25/2013 12:00 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Walt wrote:
I loved this part:
Responses claimed with absolute certainty there were laws that
prevented any changes once a lens was released unless they were
announced . . .
Reminds me of the kid in sixth grade who settled every argument with,
you
Walt wrote:
On 7/25/2013 11:51 AM, P.J. Alling wrote:
While attending College in Rhode Island, I used to approach people who
were wearing a t-shirt with an out of state attraction, and say matter
of factly You do know that under General Law paragraph X,
wearing apparel that advertised
On 25 Jul 2013, at 18:34, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
You probably could have gotten 100% compliance had you been carrying a
clipboard.
More likely 0% compliance. In my experience nothing clears a street
faster than someone with a clipboard taking a survey. I'll walk
Bob W wrote:
On 25 Jul 2013, at 18:34, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
You probably could have gotten 100% compliance had you been carrying a
clipboard.
More likely 0% compliance. In my experience nothing clears a street
faster than someone with a clipboard taking a survey.
://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com
Subject: Semi-OT: silent lens upgrades
Roger Cicala of lensrentals.com talks about silent lens upgrades and
makes a few snarky comments about the blogosphere along the way:
http://www.lensrentals.com
changes,
warranty reductions, process improvements, product competition
Nothing to see here, move on
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com
Subject: Semi-OT: silent lens upgrades
Roger Cicala
On 7/25/2013 3:11 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Bob W wrote:
On 25 Jul 2013, at 18:34, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
You probably could have gotten 100% compliance had you been carrying a
clipboard.
More likely 0% compliance. In my experience nothing clears a street
faster than
The only Pentax 135mm that is better than the K135/2.5 is the A135/1.8.
(Screwmount, original K mount, newer K, M, A, F or FA)
Regards, Bob S.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting article, thanks for the link.
It would seem that the optical
But the Version 2 of the last Takumar would have been its equal.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote:
The only Pentax 135mm that is better than the K135/2.5 is the A135/1.8.
(Screwmount, original K mount, newer K, M, A, F or FA)
Regards, Bob S.
On Thu,
I don't know about that.
The last version of the Takumar Screwmounts were carried on in the 1st
versions of the K Mounts.
The first K135/3.5 (52mm filter) is different from the later K135/2.5
(58mm filter).
I've never seen a screwmount 135/2.5 Takumar design.
There are some sad 135/2.8 bayonet
On 7/25/2013 1:18 PM, Walt wrote:
On 7/25/2013 12:00 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Walt wrote:
I loved this part:
Responses claimed with absolute certainty there were laws that
prevented any changes once a lens was released unless they were
announced . . .
Reminds me of the kid in sixth grade who
The SMCP 135mm f 2.5 and SMCP 135mm f3.5 were both part of the lens line
at the same time. A high/low option. One had the choice of the fast
expensive lens of the slower bargain lens, I have examples of both, and
both are excellent performers, with the build quality you'd expect from
the
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote:
I've never seen a screwmount 135/2.5 Takumar design.
Well I'll have to take pictures then.
: )
I've got two copies of the Super Takumar and one copy of the Version 2
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar (all 135mm f2.5).
And I've
26 matches
Mail list logo
