Hi,
I can vouch for the VS1 90/2.5 is as good as its cult status. I can`t
say anything about the other lenses because I`ve never owned them,
but I`m sure they are very fine lenses. However, the VS1 90/2.5 is
sharp corner to corner even at f2.5 and exhibits a kind of 3D effect.
Steve Larson
The speed of a system is the sum of the speed of it's parts. If the hard drive
is to the specifications of the manufacture, and in a Mac you certainly don't
roll your own so to speak, then the analysis is valid. I don't think I'd be
very happy to buy a machine crippled by the manufacturer using
That's really too bad. Most people aren't aware that unlabeled CDs have no
real physical protection on their backs. The substrate that stores the data
is held in place by a relatively thin and fragile layer of resin. I always put
a label on any data CD I'm going to be handling a lot. (I've
Some good bidding to be had currently with half the
internet DDoS'ed with Microsofts SQL server there is
less competition
Happy bidding
Kevin
--
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Kevin Waterson
Port Macquarie,
Hi, adphoto.
Of the 4 which is the better macro?
Well, you have to be more specific, or expand your 4 -
There are (as far as I know) only one VS1 90/2.5, one VS1 105/2.5,
and one Kiron 105/2.8. However, there have been at least three
Tamron 90mm macros - the original (I believe) 90/2.5 with
Mike Johnston wrote:
Webster's Second
I found this brief little web-soundbite about Webster's Second. It lays out
the story fairly well:
http://www.inu.org/bieyi/cruises/webster.htm
Great info!
I've been saving this post to be answered, but haven't got around to
it for some reason.
Anyone familiar with, or actually an owner of one of these lenses? I
think they were made 1960 - 62. Filter size 55mm. Semi-auto diaphragm. How's
the optical performance as compared to the later F:1.9 Super Takumar in
thread mount?
Paul
This testing was done by Popular Photography in 1973, so take that
into account.
This is on-axis flare, lens wide open.
Nevertheless, of all the lens tested then, the SMC Takumars came out
way ahead of everybody else, and the lowest were:
50/1.4 @ 0.47%
55/1.8 @ 0.58% and
35/3.5 @ 0.62%
Wiped
I can't access the page...
It seems to have been 'removed' according to the window that comes up. Odd.
keith whaley
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3003302028category=15240
Hi, Steve.
Is the series 1 vivitar 90mm as good as its cult status ?
I can vouch for the VS1 90/2.5 is as good as its cult status. I
can`t say anything about the other lenses because I`ve never owned
them, but I`m sure they are very fine lenses. However, the VS1
90/2.5 is sharp corner to
Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
Aren't they available on CD-ROM or DVD? I think you can get the OED on
CD-ROM, at least.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
Marcel Laufer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike,
Where would Konica be in your ranking of 'best lens coatings'? Marcello
According to a Konica lens site( http://cyberdenis.topcities.com/lenses.htm
), Around 1973 lenses were changed by replacing the metal focus ring to a
mooth, round ruberized,
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 05:22:19 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
I can't access the page...
It seems to have been 'removed' according to the window that comes up. Odd.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3003302028category=15240
I accessed it without a problem
Later,
Gary
Hi Fred,
I would say they are all pretty similar in resolving power and
color. I know the bokeh and 3D effect
comes into play nicely when the subject matter has more depth,
regarding the 90/2.5, and that would be without the 1:1 adapter.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
Everyone has a
Many years ago--late 1980s, I think--in a comparison test, Consumer Reports
or maybe Popular Science severely downrated the Mac because their testers
couldn't figure out how to turn it on.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's not at all the same as the Super Tak or SMC Tak 1.9 or 1.8. Not in the
same league. Avoid it. Do consider the Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolor 80/1.8,
which is virtually the same as the Pentax, right down to the diaphragm
design.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Keith,
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 05:22:19 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
I can't access the page...
It seems to have been 'removed' according to the window that comes up. Odd.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3003302028category=15240
That's odd. It
Paul Franklin Stregevsky wrote:
I've thought of starting a thread, Which camera maker's
lenses are the
closest thing to Pentax in optical quality?
That sounds like a good idea!
If we look only at manual-focus
lenses, I would have to say Konica and Olympus. Read the
Olympus list, and
you'll
For those not aware of it.. or if you're having problems on some of your
shopping sites (or other sites for that matter)
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/25/1245206mode=threadtid=109
Cheers,
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Waterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday,
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:15:30 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
There used to be a compact version of the OED. It was one volume with
very thin paper. The print was so small it came
Yeah but as an outdoor photographer the cases are totally useless until it
comes time to sell the lens.
I had to buy a backpack to haul around my 600.
- Original Message -
From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I love lenses that come with their own metal case...
makes you feel like
Hi Heiko,
Just a few quick notes...
I've just read it.
I just read all of it too.
I think, that Michael is right, when he says that the digital
workflow is better for him. It is faster and the results are
perfect to a certain paper size.
These are my thoughts too.
BUT - this comparisons
Based on those comparisons, I concluded film was best rather than the
authors contention. The trouble I see with my digital pics is color. It
simply does not capture color as well as film does and this comparison shows
that its the same for the Canon.
- Original Message -
From: Rüdiger
Indeed it is!
However, just as my juices start really flowing, I remind myself that
Canon 1Ds costs $8000!
An absolutely amazing machine.
keith whaley
Rüdiger Neumann wrote:
Hallo
here an interesting test
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml
regards
Rüdiger
I suggest you try yours with an open mind and believe your eyes above my
words
--Mike
Thanks. I will, and I'll soon find out how it works out, and report
back. smile
Good! I'll look forward to your report.
--Mike
P.S. No offense taken at anything in this thread, really. In fact,
- Original Message -
From: Feroze Kistan
Subject: damaged negs/artwork
I however have just managed to get a CD stuck to
my desktop, on the printed side. So when I lifted it up I got the CD back
the the silver layer is still firmly attached to my desk. I don't label
most
of my CD's so
However, I do have a question which is on topic, and we can even make
it some kind of poll:
I really would like to know everybody's favourite photo gear for
taking pictures of new born babys.
So: What camera(s) and lens(es) and (slide/bw/colour) film(s) would
you use for taking pictures of a
Mike,
Where would Konica be in your ranking of 'best lens coatings'?
Marcello,
Right up there. I've never had any problems with Konica lenses. In fact,
I've always liked them, and the Konica Hexar RF's KM lenses are first rate.
--Mike
On Saturday, January 25, 2003, at 08:42 AM, Peter Alling wrote:
and in a Mac you certainly don't
roll your own so to speak, then the analysis is valid.
What makes you think this? It's the same with virtually any product out
there. You buy a base model with standard features. And if you need
Mark Roberts wrote:
Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
Aren't they available on CD-ROM or DVD? I think you can get the OED on
CD-ROM, at least.
Considering the
G'day folks,
I'm working on gathering the stuff I need to develope BW films, mostly Tri-X and HP5,
perhaps Delta (does it matter?)
Anyway, since it's what I've always used, I'll go for D76 1+1 and I'm having a hard
time deciding what to store it in, how often and long to use it before I get
Doug Franklin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:15:30 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
There used to be a compact version of the OED. It was one volume with
very thin paper.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Feroze Kistan
Subject: damaged negs/artwork
I however have just managed to get a CD stuck to
my desktop, on the printed side. So when I lifted it up I got the CD back
the the silver layer is still firmly attached to my desk. I
On January 9 I sent a body and two lenses to Pentax for warranty
service. I expected to wait six weeks. Well, the lenses came back on
January 23. The body is still out.
I guess lens and body repair are different shops, and lens repair is
less busy. I'm seriously impressed to get the lenses
This related link should also be read: Single versus Multi-coated
Lenses http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/flare.html
These are very hoary old arguments left over from decades ago. While there
is much more difference between single coating and no coating at all than
there is between single coating and
with half the internet DDoS'ed with Microsofts SQL server
What in the world does this mean?
--Mike
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 09:24:23 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
There used to be a compact version of the OED. It was one volume with
very thin paper. The print was so small it came with a magnifier so
you could actually read it.
Sheeet, man, I do that NOW! g
:-)
Seriously, though, here are
When they state that a CD can last 100 years its the transparent plastic
layer they talkin about not
the coating that the data is burned into. Its very easy to remove it, almost
childs play. Please excuse me now I have to go find all my jewel cases.
Feroze
- Original Message -
From:
Hi,
I suppose it depends on your preferred format, 90% percent of my shots are
portrait. As to risks, check out Pal's departure from the MF world or Dougs
tarmac lens tests or Franks fav lens demise. Its not worth it. Didn't know
the canon straps came with release clips. Which model is it for, all
-Original Message-
From: Rodelion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
G'day folks,
I'm working on gathering the stuff I need to develope BW
films, mostly Tri-X and HP5, perhaps Delta (does it matter?)
Yes. No. Maybe.
Anyway, since it's what I've always used, I'll go for D76
1+1 and I'm
I'm not in a position to offer much reply on comparison between these
lenses. I bought a 105mm 2.5 Series One some years ago and at the time
noticed that its publihed test performance seemed generally superior to the
much older 90mm 2.5 Series One. That's to be expected with a design some
10+
I got:
* * * *
Invalid Item
The item you requested ( 300277363 ) is invalid, still pending, or no
longer in our database. Please check the number and try again. If this
message persists, the item has either not started and is not yet
available for viewing, or has expired and is no longer
- he chooses not the finest grained film but complains about grain
Yes and no. He starts out by saying that he's comparing the film he actually
uses. For instance, he may need the speed or the color reproduction of the
film he choses. From there, it's reasonable to talk about the grain.
If he
Mike,
Almost sounds like the comparison Michael made between the Canon 1DS
and the Pentax 67 - no?
Bruce
Saturday, January 25, 2003, 9:58:30 AM, you wrote:
The speed of a system is the sum of the speed of it's parts. If the hard
drive
is to the specifications of the manufacture, and in
I just checked the cost of subscrbing to the OED online, and it's $550
PER ANNUM!
Ok if you're a professional writer.
Whoa! If you're laboring under the delusion that most professional writers
can afford such a thing, disabuse thyself!
Writing is a particularly poor choice for making a
Don't envy you the storm, Pål.
But the light you have on clear days... sigh
Just saw a slide show by Bjarne Riesto on Wednesday.
For the list; Bjarne has a site at http://www.riesto.no/. He's got
quite a large online archive, and it's well worth a look.
Going to Tromsø and back on Monday, btw.
I'm working on gathering the stuff I need to develope BW films
Rod,
Good man.
Anyway, since it's what I've always used, I'll go for D76 1+1 [...] I've heard
the dark brownish glass flasks are the way to go, only opening it
when you use it. How many times can D76 1+1 be re-used with good
Mike wrote:
Yes and no. He starts out by saying that he's comparing the film he actually
uses. For instance, he may need the speed or the color reproduction of the
film he choses. From there, it's reasonable to talk about the grain.
Well, I wonder why someone who obviously is a fan of high
Boz wrote:
Keep in mind, and he says it a few times, he is comparing real-world
results.
So putting the image through a scanner that cannot do justice to the film is
considered real world. With such test procedures you can prove anything by simply
putting up test procedures that fits your
That's the second auction that someone's pasted the url for today that's
come up invalid (at least for me). Coincidence?
-frank
Malcolm Smith wrote:
John Whicker wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=300277363
John,
It's listed as an invalid item to me, what was it?
Almost sounds like the comparison Michael made between the Canon 1DS
and the Pentax 67 - no?
Jibe accepted, Bruce, but I still think there is one crucial difference:
Michael admits his parameters, Rob Galbraith doesn't.
That is, if Rob had said, Many of these tests are of actions that are
I used to own the Kiron 105/2.8PK; I now own the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5PK. The
Kiron didn't deliver sharp results until about f/5.6. That's why I sold it;
I use my portrait-length lens for general purpose, including shooting indoor
events under available light.
The Tokina is very sharp, even at
Don't envy you the storm, Pål.
But the light you have on clear days... sigh
One of the best museum shows I ever saw was of Scandinavian painting between
1890 and 1910. I sure wish I had gotten the catalog. Although almost all of
the paintings were representational, some of them showed almost
I love lenses that come with their own metal case... makes you
feel like you're carrying around a thermonuclear device :)
Yeah but as an outdoor photographer the cases are totally useless
until it comes time to sell the lens. I had to buy a backpack to
haul around my 600.
A nice solution
A PDMLer wishes to buy my Vivitar 90-180/4.5 Macro Zoom. He wishes
to know: Can the 90-180/4.5 be used safely on an MZ-S without
filing down the lens's unusually long rear extension?
My personal opinion is that the potential problem (of the excess
baffle material on the original line of
Pål Jensen wrote:
So putting the image through a scanner that cannot do justice to
the film is considered real world. With such test procedures you
can prove anything by simply putting up test procedures that fits
your preconceived ideas on how things should be.
If the only possibility to
What makes you think that East-German Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar (the correct spelling)
is similar to a Pentax lens? Is it a copy or what?
All the best!
Raimo
Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Paul Franklin Stregevsky
And this makes you feel good because . . .? Better call Homeland
Security . . 8^)
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/24/03 07:16PM
I love lenses that come with
Y'all can also jump in on this topic here:
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004QKe
Them thar Hatfields and McCoys is everywhere.
BR
Mike wrote:
Jibe accepted, Bruce, but I still think there is one crucial difference:
Michael admits his parameters, Rob Galbraith doesn't.
He is testing his scanner compared to digital capture whereas he conclusions are
significantly more far reaching.
If you'll notice, several people
But a test whose parameters are in constant flux and whose parametres are also
different from person to person isn't worthy to be called a test.
Pål
- Original Message -
From: Bojidar Dimitrov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 9:32 PM
Subject:
Pretty much matches my experience of owning both cameras. I've been
trying to convince myself that the 67II should be kept just for those
situations that need film, but it's getting harder. I do wish that the
Canon 50/1.4 felt better- it's a bit cheap in construction.
I still stand by my
Uh huh... Well, his was a test: I liked the 1Ds much better than the
Pentax 67, for a lot of reasons, and as far as I'm concerned, I'd much
rather have the Canon. Period!
Pål Jensen wrote:
But a test whose parameters are in constant flux...
What does THAT mean? Oh, I know what a 'constant
Randy:
I bought a 105mm 2.5 Series One some years ago and at the time
noticed that its publihed test performance seemed generally
superior to the much older 90mm 2.5 Series One.
I haven't (yet) seen any test of the VS1 105/2.5. Do you have the
details? Or, do you at least have the
Mike,
The same could be said for the PC's. What he is comparing is what he
has and uses. I don't see much, if any difference. Only that you
like Macs and I like 67's. Both made a real world test that measured
the things that they do and use. As such, both are valid tests.
Neither test is
just wondering cos connected to a macro 1:1 lens i belive that this would
give 3:1 magnification which is great for capturing ant smiles and facial
expressions. However i belive there would be a great 3 stop loss of light
Of course it's different from person to person. They are tools used for
different purposes. You want to test how good a screwdriver is for
hammering nails. This is why it is as stupid saying that one is better
as the other, as blue is better than red. There are reasons why there
are more than
frank theriault wrote:
That's the second auction that someone's pasted the url
for today that's
come up invalid (at least for me). Coincidence?
Hi Frank (and everyone),
My apologies. The item either completed or was removed. It
had only about an hour to go when I posted the URL.
It was
My mistake Albano.I just checked the negatives and it
was the OptimaII 400,not 200
Sorry.
Begin Original Message
From: Albano Garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:16:43 -0800 (PST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The little world of Dominga
I've used the 200 just
Keith wrote:
But a test whose parameters are in constant flux...
What does THAT mean? Oh, I know what a 'constant state of flux' means,
but I don't know what YOU mean by the statement.
I mean that when you are making a test that most people interpret as what is better
of camera A or B,
Bruce wrote:
Of course it's different from person to person. They are tools used for
different purposes. You want to test how good a screwdriver is for
hammering nails. This is why it is as stupid saying that one is better
as the other, as blue is better than red. There are reasons why
Has anyone had any hands on experience with the Makinon 300mm f4? What would
one in good condition be worth ($US)?
Peter
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
there is one on ebay
is it a good zoom
i notice it is fast 4.5 that is good?
- Original Message -
From: Rüdiger Neumann
Subject: What is better? Digital Full Frame against 67
Hallo
here an interesting test
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml
Mr Reichmann seems to be making a career out of proving that digital image
capture is superior
Bruce wrote:
The same could be said for the PC's. What he is comparing is what he
has and uses. I don't see much, if any difference. Only that you
like Macs and I like 67's. Both made a real world test that measured
the things that they do and use. As such, both are valid tests.
Neither
No, no, Bruce lad...
I said I prefer the results of one over the other, AS PRESENTED by Michael.
I did NOT say one IS better than the other. How would I know?
Mucho difference.
keith whaley
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
Of course it's different from person to person. They are tools used for
Illogical and incorrectly presented supposition, just this side of irrational.
keith
Pål Jensen wrote:
Bruce wrote:
Of course it's different from person to person. They are tools used for
different purposes. You want to test how good a screwdriver is for
hammering nails.
Mike,
Could that have been the Skagen painters, from the northernmost part
of Denmark?
http://www.danacup.pp.se/Usa/Skagen.htm
http://www.skagen-tourist.dk/side4.htm
http://www.aarhuskunstmuseum.dk/html_uk/retro_html/dk_kunstner_uk.html
#skagen
There were many Norwegian painters in contact with
Hi,
I am about to partition and format a harddisk I got from a friend.
I am looking at a fdisk window, not knowing what alternatives to pick.
All advice I have deals with preparing a C drive. I don't want to do
that.
The disk is supposed to be a 10 gig:er. For some reason it has been
partitioned
Pål Jensen wrote:
Keith wrote:
But a test whose parameters are in constant flux...
What does THAT mean? Oh, I know what a 'constant state of flux' means,
but I don't know what YOU mean by the statement.
I mean that when you are making a test that most people interpret as what is
Correction;
Otto Sinding of course came to Northern Norway.
Jostein
- Original Message -
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
However, I doubt that any of them ever came to Northern Norway.
The OED (Second edition) is indeed available on CD and can be loaded to your
Hard Drive.
If you're going to use a dictionary, why not use _the_ authoritative source.
I'm a bit of a lexicophile, but can't really afford to get the full 20
volume printed set.
I copied the CD version to my HDD, and
In my most humble opinion, f/4.5 is not particularly fast. In fact,
while it's not uncommon with zooms that go all the way to 350 mm, it's
considered fast simply by comparison to other 350 mm lenses!
Use fast film and don't particularly worry about it.
It might be more difficult to focus with an
More actually.
At 05:56 PM 1/25/2003 -0600, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: What is better? Digital Full Frame against 67
You missed the fact that he didn't compare the originals.
Har, maybe he should output the D1s digifile to a 8000line slide
Oh. My error.
keith
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Peter Alling wrote:
I just checked the cost of subscrbing to the OED online, and it's $550
PER ANNUM!
Ok if you're a professional writer.
No, not OK.
Sorry, check out the comparison in Pop Photography this month. I can't say
that
the detail comparison is more flattering but print from the ISO 100 color
print
film obviously carries more information than the print from the 9 megapixel
dslr
(see Digital Directions, Got Enough Pixel Power?
smile Very nice!
keith whaley
Iren Henry Chu wrote:
Dear all,
This Japanese folk has tired of all the Pentax D-SLR speculations and
tortures from waiting. He instead bought a EOS-D60 for his FA*85/1.4 lens:
http://www-esl2.isc.chubu.ac.jp/mun/camera/pentax/penta-eos.html
Nice idea!
Sometimes you can be too cute.
At 11:34 AM 1/25/2003 -0500, you wrote:
Many years ago--late 1980s, I think--in a comparison test, Consumer Reports
or maybe Popular Science severely downrated the Mac because their testers
couldn't figure out how to turn it on.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Outside of a
We don't have to admit that at all.
In some ways I get very tired of this argument. High end digital is good
enough for most commercial use now. That is not the same thing as it is
better than film. First comparing a digitalised film image to digital
imaging is kind of stupid unless you need a
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not at all willing to say EOS 1D surpasses 35mm.
have you personally done a comparison yet?
Herb
smile Very nice!
The images surely do look like they have typical FA* 85/1.4 bokeh.
Fred
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you compare a high quality photographic print from film to a
digital print from a digital image the photographic print is still better.
And if you compare a large format photographic print to a digital print it
is quite a lot better.
a couple
A box to put it in.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3002060368category=15240
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
(This is the camera-geeking-enhanced version of half of the
LiveJournal post I just made about my day.)
Got some face-to-face time with friends today. Among them was one
who's currently an English teacher in China but came home for a
holiday. After using PHD cameras (Push Here, Dummy) for
My only question: How'd he do it? Maybe I could enjoy Pentax lenses on my
Canon A2E
Bob Keefer
---
Keefer Photography
Fine art hand-painted photos
www.bkpix.com
Ok I don't usually do this but here's a bargain alert. I don't think this
is breaking any rules
so to speak since it's a buy it now auction and I think the price more than
reasonable.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3003518645category=15240
I already have one of these little
my Japanese is aweful, is that a home made adaptor? or is it an extension
tube with eos mount on one side and k mount on the other? That would take
out infinity focus wouldn't it? I was told an k mount to eos mount adaptor
would not work becuase of the placement of the pentax apeture springs
I was wondering if all FA31 cases came with the round plastic lock instead
of the retangular one came with 43 77?
http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/31-77.jpg
regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months
I'm not at the same computer that contains the PDML Digest in which someone
asked me to document my statement that the Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 80/1.8
is similar to the Pentax Super Takumar 85/1.8. My source is a series of
postings and private mailings in 2001 and 2002 by PDML's sadly missed CZJ
Yep, perfect paper weight. How much would you pay for a polished stone.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Peter Jesser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 9:53 AM
Subject: Makinon 300mm f4
Has anyone had any hands on experience with the Makinon 300mm
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
