regards,
Andre
Is K35/3.5 better than your K135/2.5? I also own it and wonder.
Alek
Uzytkownik Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa?:
Andre wrote:
Having said that, K35/3.5 is in a special class. It is one of the
highest resolution lens ever made, and have no flare even with spot
lights
[http://www.7t7lab.de/franz/takumar.jpg]
It is a M42 mount and an exceptional lens.
Thanks for the prompt reply, good to hear that! So I guess $19 isn't a bad
price for this lens then.. I'll probably try and get it tomorrow.
Thanks again,
franz.
There is a nice square metal hood made to fit
Is there more than one Pentax bellows?
The MZS manual says that Auto Bellows A
cannot be used with this camera. There is
one on a local auction site for ZAR600 (about U$D60)
He also has a LX, 3 Finders and a 55mm f1.8 lens plus filter
for ZAR 1500 (about USD150)
Are both these worth the price???
abandom PEntax, since compatibility is
the best feature in Pentax.
Alek
Uzytkownik Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa?:
Hi,
What about old manual K lenses(K, M and A)?
Alek
Everybody relax. Pentax USA says the new Pentax DLSR, will of course, take
the existing K mount lenses for sure
Hi Andre,
All the manual says is Note that Auto bellows A cannot be used with this
camera because it cannot be fitted to it.
How many bellows are there
I think K, M and A, but maybe only two. Very very similar. They look
the same to me. Except for the extra contacts (A-model).
I want the
Am I wrong or we should talk about lenses used and way they are used?
I put a reversed Componon on a bellows and photograph a dime at
double life size. On the monorail, I focus the same setting so that
the dime is 10 times life size. Componon being a fine performer at
both 1:2 and 1:10. So
That makes sense to me. Basically it is impossible to capture
more detail than exists. So if the actual subject is smaller than
your film size, it will not be able to capture any more.
Until we get past macro, into real close up photography.
One of my PUG subjects was an American dime, shot
. It is coated on clear 5mm acetate
substrate. A tungsten light source is suggested. This is movie film
stock which is cut to a shorter length and repacked with permission
from Kodak. 30.5m/roll
Andre Langevin wrote:
The current thread about the Auto Bellows has me running an idea through my
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I found other starting points. Technical Pan; Kodak 5302; Kodak 5360.
5302 is very slow (about 1 iso) but also very cheap (15$ for 100'). See
http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/%7Eluca/bwslides.html
that's interesting because Kodak rates the 5302
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
that's interesting because Kodak rates the 5302 film at ISO 250.
Herb
Where?
http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f33/f3
3.jhtml
Herb
Indeed. But Kodak speaks here of a printing speed of 250. I
An image an inch wide, enlarged
from 8 x 10 to any size you like, will be no better than an image an inch
wide enlarged from 35 mm to the same size.
So, getting a larger image (on a plate) of the same 1 object (using
the proper optics) would not bring any advantage?
Those matters are kind of
Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: 35mm vs 8x10 macro
Am I wrong or we should talk about lenses used and way they are used?
I put a reversed
Now don't start telling me
that you can use higher magnification to fill the metre square, that's not
the point. You've already done all that, decided on magnification and the
rest.
Don,
What I was trying to say earlier is that pictorial photographers DON'T
decide on magnification. It's
I don't see the problem with the M42 lenses. Since it's fairly sure the
new DSLR with take K mount, the adaptor should work, and a good lens is
a good lens. Besides, a digi-screwhead is SUCH a Pentax thing . . .
;-)
Steven Desjardins
I understand that the most valuable thing that is lost when
My speakers were too loud. Now I have to calm down...
Just in case
http://www.homestead.com/speedingtickets/
- Original Message -
From: Ken Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: Parking ticket
For some reason, I am
Just received a SMCT 135/2.5 (later version with same quality with
SMC 135/2.5). I got it for portrait because it has good quality at
wide open aperture (no test it yet, just based on other user
reviews) and it is in near new condition as well as at a very good
price.
One question: There is a
I am thinking about getting a K30/2.8. But its price could let me
have also-good K35/3.5 and K28/3.5 plus remaining money in my pocket.
I am not a collector. Is it still reasonable to have K30?
Tough choice. First I thought it's better to have two lenses and
choose the focal lenght according
I would like to enter the world of microphotography. What microscope
type is the most usefull for photographers. I already have the
Microscope Adapter K and two Mplan lenses (5X and 10X). Basic
Olympus microscopes seem to go for little money on eBay.
Maybe Don could give me some advices?
By the way, I found in reference books on optics that acetone is a
safe product to use on glass if you want to clean fungus. To be used
pure unless the lens is a doublet (or a triplet) when it have to be
diluted 1:1 with water. I'm not sure this is enough to really wipe
out all fungus
Mark's comments:
If Asahi had offered the K bayonet mount at least 10
years earlier, Pentax would still be a brand of choice
for the professional user.
It would have helped to have come out with bayonnet mount 3 or 4
years earlier, but 10 years? I don't think so. Until the end of the
Thanks Don. I'm a true beginner, so I should go on the WEB trying to
get some basic instruction about microscopes, lighting etc.
First of all what are your specimens going to be like.
Sections of plants?
Small solid objects? Seeds, shells, tiny animals, insects,
Possibly all those.
pollen
How rare is this particular zoom?
(...)
Comments as to quality?
Lon
Joe wrote:
It is a very short zoom range and is more like a lens that lets you
make cropping adjustments in the finder, or you can think of it as a
35mm, 30mm, or 28mm lens that lets you pull back to 24mm when you
need it.
Andre wrote:
You probably mix this lens with the A28/2.8. The M or A 35/2.8
lenses are both superb.
Well, mine certainly isn't. It is prettey pedestrian; about what
should be expected from a zoom these days.
Pål
Pal, as you are the first one, to my knowledge, to have a so-so
35/2.8
Since I never take portraits, except for
the occasional one at 400-600mm...
--
John Mustarde
www.photolin.com
You mean the Pentax Mirror Zoom 400-600mm? Portraits of donuts?
Andre
--
--- Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I seem to recall the A35/2.8 being poorly regarded.
Mark
You probably mix this lens with the A28/2.8. The M
or A 35/2.8
lenses are both superb.
No. You can read Pal's comments on this lens at Stan
Halpin's website. Also, I was at the house
assumed that the
differences (and I HAD seen them) were simply due to the different
printing quality of the various booklets. But now I own a booklet where
the diagrams of the K and M lenses are one above the other, and the
printing quality is the same. The differences are there.
Thanks to Andre
So, I'm still confused. Which is the best-the K, M,
or A 50mm 1.4???
Steve
Sorry Steve if my long e-mail has been confusing.
Usually it is said that the K and the A lens (and later auto-focus
1.4) are better than the M. The differences are subtle and one
particular M lens might be better
The one that gets you the best shots.
For me it was the Zuiko 50/1.4 (on an OM-1)
Jeff.
Oh my God! A Zuiko!
Seriously, has anyone ever tried the screw mount Zuiko 50/1.4? Is it
different from the bayonet version?
Andre
--
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams
Subject: Re: BW film/developer combinations
I know it can be pushed. But I don't want to start all that
over again. It's
been six months at least since we discussed that topic.
You must have ignored my evidence to the contrary.
William
$220 seems OK if you prefer to keep working with a MX. But not $290.
Here a CLA is around 105-115 $ can + 15% tax. And that imply going
up to the shutter, so it's no big deal to replace the curtains once
you're there. I could ask for a quotation if you want to go on with
an MX as there are
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams
Subject: Re: BW film/developer combinations
I know it can be pushed. But I don't want to start all that
over again. It's
been six months at least since we discussed that topic.
You must have ignored my evidence to the
...also shooting with a Tokina 28=70mm ATX pro 2.6-2.8 and 24-90mm Pentax
(flares pretty badly but is sharp and contrasty...
wayne
It's the first time I hear the 24-90mm flares badly. What I have
heard until now is that it is a very low flare wide-angle zoom.
Could you be a bit more precise
Are these good zooms, in terms of image quality? Is
the 28-50 a rare lens?
Not rare, but not common either. I have never tried the 28-50mm I
got for a bargain price one day. But I used the 24-35mm and both
zooms share the same style and construction (very high quality). I
have seen a test
I just acquired the SMC-M 28mm F/3.5 lens. I will
also soon be acquiring the SMC-M 35mm, F/3.5 lens. Do
you think it is worth keeping both focal lengths?
35/3.5 (K, not M by the way) is an exceptionnal lens. Very high
resolution and very low flare. I would keep it, and... also the
28/3.5:
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Could you post a link or two for such free software. Whenever I google
for color calibration stuff all I find is service bureaus and (usually
expensive) commercial calibration packages.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
try these to start with.
It moved to http://medfmt.8k.com/third/
So what happened to that cult classics web page anyway?
I noticed it was gone over the weekend.
Regards, Bob S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Several sources, including the now-defunct Third party Lens Resource web
page, rated the f2.8-4.0 version as
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have one for sale at $5 + about $1.50 ship (I paid fifteen with
shipping).
I bought it for Wiziwyg and found out I needed the one made by
Wiziwyg (a lot more expensive).
Andre
these have to come with the calibration data. does yours or do
Ilford 3200 Delta has a real speed of about 800.
--Mike
Mike, I have a bunch of Ilford 3200 to develop. What would be the
best development time with D-76 and with Microphen at 800?
Films were exposed at 1000 (grey card), during shows, but I should
probably develop at 800 as expressions in
Steve Larson wrote:
It is probably actually a little faster than 2.3.
Steve may be basing this statement on a test that I conducted with my older,
single-coated Vivitar 135/2.3 in M42 mount. Compared to my SMC 135/2.5K, it
delivered about a half-stop faster shutter speed at every aperture.
I
I say it might be a little
faster than rated because I was shooting side by side with Shel, we
were both using LXae, 100 speed film, I was using the 135/2.3,
he was using the renowned 85/1.8 (wish I had one), it was a dark
and gloomy day and we were both wide open.
Shooting EXACTLY the same
I never said the single coated is a half stop faster. I`m just going by what
I saw, both cameras pointed at the same subject, standing side by
side. You are correct that it could be meter fluctuations, I know my
meter is dead on,
and I bet Shel`s was too. My 135/2.3 was a K mount multi coated
Kelvin Lee sent a photo showing the relative sizes of some 135mm
lenses (including his new Vivitar 135/1.5) to Paul Stregevsky, who
in turn passed it along to me for hosting.
http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/135-comparison.jpg
That big Vivitar is surely a monster - I'm going to call it
Lenzilla
Although in my own
experience, scanned color negatives printed on ink jet have replaced
color wet prints. They're just better. Of course the same is not true of BW.
Yeah, why is that? I'm really kind of mystified that _no_ inkjet printer
manufacturer has come out with a dedicated BW
Actually you can make your own. One example is the Epson 1160 (used)
with four shades of grey instead of 3 colors + 1 black. You can get
archival inks and use a CFS (Continuous Flow System) to lower the
cost on the long run.
Andre,
Yeah, I have several friends who do that, including one
I kind of agree with Len, as this Tupperware seller might know very
little about cameras. I just hope you'll convince him that the
shutter curtain problem should have been noted, and that the mirror
problem he mentionned normally calls for an easy repair while
replacement of shutter curtains
With the poor quality of the images on eBay, it'd be tough to say how
good looking the MX could be. What does it look like, Colin?
Len
True. Bad photos and only a great condition mention that is worth
a tupperware.
I hope Collin will have some good news soon...
Andre
--
http://home.earthlink.net/~richditch/aboutme.htm
and
http://www.birdsasart.com/b5.html
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~richditch/roadrunner1.htm
That must be an example of a N*k*n bad bokeh...
Andre
--
A friend of mine, serious about ornithology, takes all his photos
with a rather small digital camera set at infinity and shooting
through the eyepiece of a high quality spotting scope (on a tripod).
The results are way better than what I can do with my Takumar 300mm +
high res. scanner. But
Decided to test my 85-210 F4.5 SMCPZ lens
with some TMAX 100 today. To my surprise
I spotted 5 more of the same birds resting
on a temporary construction divider:
http://jcoconnell.com/temp/birds04s.jpg
TMAX 100
1/250 @ F9.5
~180mm setting
Nice panoramic shot!
I can say one thing, this lens
Then maybe we should talk about the diameter of the image circle.
Admitedly not very practical...
Andre
Well, I don't think a digital is a 35mm camera whatever format it uses. Only
cameras that use 35mm film are 35mm cameras.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
-
Hi folks,
I just bought two smc pentax K-primes (not M) a 3.5/135mm (35euro/U$) and a
3.5/28mm (41euro/U$). Are these lenses any good? Is the price right?
Thanks in advance
Rene
How can we see such low prices? Sellers must think these lenses are
totally obsolete! Well... good for us
Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then maybe we should talk about the diameter of the image circle.
Admitedly not very practical...
Hey, why impractical?
Hassy fans could have a DSLR with a 30mm x 30mm sensor and it would
still accept conventional 35mm SLR lenses ;-)
--
Mark Roberts
what would be a good price for this lens around $50 US
In stores, around here, they go for $60 US (well used, good optics)
to $85 US (mint).
Andre
--
24-90mm- quite good... not as contasty or sharp as the vivitar
35-85mm it replaced...
I'm surprised because the 24-90 is a very recent design and the
Vivitar an older one. At what focal lenght and aperture was the
Vivitar better than the Pentax?
Andre
--
Isnt the viv 35-85 a varifocal ( not a true zoom)lens?
If so that combined with the narrower range could account
for it's better performance.
JCO
Maybe. But are all zooms varifocal lenses that have their focus
adjusted automatically by another cam inside the lens? In other
words, was a zoom
Does such a lens exist i have $50 bucks riding on it.
Is it a good performer?
What would you use soft focus for?
It does exist but I think it is an uncommon lens (although I have
never checked eBay for this lens). $50 is a give-away price for
sure. Soft focus is good for portraits...
Hello,
I enjoy reading most posts, but don't enter in, until now. This is
an odd question. For something so simple, it seems very hard to
find. I have the MZ-S and BG-10 grip, and do not like the strap
that comes with it. My friend has a Canon, and when he bought the
grip, the wrist/hand
Check out this BW test shot (no artistry) I took today
with the Vivitar Series 1 28mm F1.9
(VMC, M42 version):
http://jcoconnell.com/temp/otherpool01s.jpg
I cannot get the page to appear. I'll try tomorrow. Good night.
Techie stuff:
Lens VS1 28mm F1.9 VMC (M42)
Camera - 1969 vintage Asahi
I read all day long. The list is the only thing that saves me from the
drudgery of my job.
Evan
I wish I had the time to do so! The computer is at my job and I'm
out of town on a regular basis. I get to read about 20%
Andre
--
I only have one Auto-Takumar, the 55mm f/1.8, and it has 8 aperture blades.
When near open, it's so close to a pure circle...3.5 on down, it's
nicely done.
keith whaley
On the other side this older aperture blade material is shiny, as
with first generation Super-Takumar lenses. In some
Just got yesterday what is the smallest M42 Takumar I've ever
owned ( I own ALOT). The 1959 vintage 35mm F3.5 Auto-Takumar.
This has a semi-automatic aperture and is so small the filter size
is 46mm! Way cool. http://jcoconnell.com/temp/spotat3535.jpg
It reminds me (hood and all) of the
And...we've not even mentioned centering or collimation problems.
Where did that come from? Not me...
That sort of thing belongs to the lens maker (grinder/polisher), so
s/he doesn't introduce such...
keith whaley
But it's always surprising to read in many tests that even expensive
lenses are
From David A. Mann:
I've spotted this lens in a local camera shop and I'm just a little
tempted as it would make a nice companion with the LX. I envisage adding
this lens to my lightweight snapshooting kit, which is currently made
of the LX and 35mm f/3.5.
Good idea.
I haven't found a lot
Hi, Keith,
Is your Auto-Takumar the real old one, with the alternating
chrome/black on the focus ring scallops? That's the one that came
with the original Asahi Pentax K, I believe, and is really hard to
find. Later, a 55/1.8 Auto-Takumar came standard on the H3/S3, but
it was really a
I have seen a few times that the Durst Neonon lenses were made by
Pentax. Also that Rodenstock has made some Neonon lenses at one
time. True?
I have two Neonon 50/2.8 that look different. But on both, the
focusing rubber looks a lot like Pentax.
Neonon lenses were the best Durst lenses and
Hi,
There is a grip strap that fits on the IQZoom70. Download
the PDF from www.pentax.com, the file is called Grip_Strap.pdf.
It should work for what you have in mind. How are you going to hold the
camera
if you are shooting in portrait mode? Because you now have the strap
dangling from the top
Poll:
What PENTAX ( Asahi) lens is the best overall
value in the used market?
My Vote:
the 55mm F1.8/2.0 Super-Takumars
Great performers (even without SMC)
and they sell for less than $15.00 !
JCO
You're probably right...
I'd add the M 28/3.5. When you find one, it's usually cheap.
Andre
I'd add the M 28/3.5. When you find one, it's usually cheap.
Andre
Is it the best of all the slow (F2.8/3.5)
28mms made in Kmount?
Supposedly second best, not far behind the K.
How much do they usually sell for? I bought one a few years
back on ebay for around $60 if I recall. Never
What about the old FA28-105 Power Zoom?
The old FA... !?!?
For me, anything FA is new. Super-Takumar 70-150mm is old...
Just kidding.
Andre
--
Paul,
There shouldn't be any problems -- I believe all the Takumars
(preset diaphragms) and Auto-Takumars were compatible with the
Spotmatic and later cameras. The only difference, of course, is that
sliding the meter switch up on the Spotmatic will stop the lens
down, and if you turn the
The Zuiko-G f/1.7 is legend for it's sharpness.
(...)
What's the coating problem? Ghosting, loss of light, flaring?
keith
One solution is to use a shade, which, as you know, is tricky for a
RF because you see part of it in the viewfinder. And with an
effective tulip hood (made out of
I had an Olympus 35SP for a while, too -- beautiful lens and a
beautiful camera. It's huge, though -- much larger than the Oly 35RD
and 35RC, and larger than the Canonet QL17 GIII.
The 35SP is also quite loud, at least for a rangefinder. The 35RD
and 35RC, as well as rangefinders like the
Andre wrote:
35-S (and SII) are great silent cameras. Most impressive of all is
the 1957 Wide-S with a 35mm f2 made of 8 elements The Olympus is the
smallest 35/2 rangefinder around.
Andre,
Unlike the Olympus 35-S of the 1970s, the 35-S of the 1950s had no meter.
Did the Wide-S have a
What's a fair price for a M20 f4?
Evan
$300. $250 would be a bargain.
Andre
--
. Maybe I'll settle
for a M28 or an A28 instead. You know somehow I wound up with three 50s for
two bodies, I guess you can never have too much of a good thing.
Evan
Andre Langevin knidly wrote:
What's a fair price for a M20 f4?
Evan
$300. $250 would be a bargain.
Andre
--
--
I read somewhere just this week about a DIY replacement for a motor drive
nicad pack. Can someone repost that link?
Also are new nicad packs available? If so anyone know the cost?
I just ordered 36 batteries to refurbish 3 power packs. They are
Ni-MH batteries, so don't have any memory effect
I just ordered 36 batteries to refurbish 3 power packs. They are
Ni-MH batteries, so don't have any memory effect and give power for
a longer period of time when charged. I could probably do the job
myself following this how-do
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/lxnicdpack.html
but I've
On 29 Jan 2003 at 11:58, Andre Langevin wrote:
I read somewhere just this week about a DIY replacement for a motor drive
nicad pack. Can someone repost that link?
Also are new nicad packs available? If so anyone know the cost?
I just ordered 36 batteries to refurbish 3 power packs
OTOH, NiMH peak detecting chargers might prematurely terminate the
charge of NiCd packs due to a false peak on voltage during the charge
cycle.
That happens with AAA batteries in a Radio Shack top gun charger...
Now I know why. I use an old slow charger for these.
Peak detecting chargers with
From Peter:
Worth mentioning:
28mm F3.5 M - not seen one of these before.
Not nearly as common as the 2.8...
24mm F2.8 M - tidy but I still prefer the 24-35.
Yeah, more versatile and it's sharp from 5.6 on, but check out its
distorsion at 24mm. Allegedly, it doesn't matter if you're in
Hi,
The nearest I can find is a GP60AAHHB, which is a 2/3 AA size,
0.6Ah cell. Max charge 60mA for 14 hours. Manufacturer seems
to be called either Green Charge or Green Power. The writing on
the Ebay ones seems to be far eastern.
mike
2/3AA won't fit. Well, are we still talking about
I have no idea. I found AFAIK last week on Google, I guessed about
grin and HAR! (nor sure yet), but Vs:? Does it mean you are giving
your opinin after a delay? (But it would be true for many others.)
It might be important for you to do it this way but your messages are
always (in Eudora)
Just moving onto zooms. Anyone thinking about the mechanics of a zoom
lens will have surely pondered that the lenshood of such an optic will
have to be a compromise. Now, if you have a 28-70 mm (say), then you will
have deduced that the(fixed plastic or metal) hood is really a 28mm hood
and
Auto Chinon 45/2.8 (18mm long, all metal)
Cosinon 40/2.5 (20mm long)
Pentax M 40/2.8 (18mm long)
Pentax 43/1.9 FA Limited(28mm long)
Porst Color Reflect 40/2.5 (a rebadged Cosinon)
Rikenon 28/2.8 (20mm deep)
Rikenon 45/2.8 (a plastic version of the Cosina)
Paul, I guess you meant Chinon?
FWIW
FWIW?
I have to learn all these. Any list of current abreviations of this type?
Andre
--
Someday, somebody will invent a dynamic dedicated hood for zooms, so
that the length and shape changes as you zoom :-)
Andre wrote: There are two brands that make zoom rubber hoods, Hoya and
Hama.
--
Tamron made an ingenious rigid-plastic telescoping hood for its SP
70-210/3.5. The lens
The old Komura Telemore (7 elements) I see sometimes looks very
sturdy. Is it a good 2X to put on a screw mount camera and is it
multi-coated? As good as other 7-elements third party 2X? (I
remember it's been said that the Vivitar macro 2X is a good one.)
Andre
--
The other third party 24mm lens is a Ricoh Rikenon 24mm f2.8. (...)
It's a decent lens and in non-flare conditions does quite well. It
is not very good with flare though.
I ... still have the Rikenon and also a K-24 f2.8. I don't use
either very much, though.
- MCC
As the Pentax-M 28/3.5
Paul:
After seeing your post, I called the owner just now.
Apparently after I left the store, the guy behind the
counter pulled out some kind of special light. When
he looked inside the lens, he said it is full of mold.
He said it is basically a paper weight. So,
tomorrow, I am getting the
Jose,
Indeed the Metz has its own exposure ckeck function (a red light). However,
why does the LX automatic exposure check function sometimes at all?
?:-|
Peter
What my TTL Metz flashes (CT-4 CT-5) do with my LXs: they don't
flicker so I have to check outside on the flash. I have not
noticed
How does it work? It must give good 110 negs... A pic of your
adaptor would indeed be fun to look at...
Andre
Hehe,
in fact I once have built a K/110 adaptor - I always wanted to post a
picture of this.
Looks funny with the 85 f/1.4 on it!
:-)
Thomas
--
It is not as good as the 24-35 (from what I've read here). I once
had the slightly different M version. It would pic the tone of the
surroundings because of flare. Fresh white snow, taken under the sun
(sun in the back), in a coniferous forest, was clearly greenish.
Pentax soon changed the
I've heard of the F80-210/3.5-4.5 Zoom
Are you sure such a lens ever existed? K85-210mm/3.5 did, though.
Andre
--
DJE wrote:
SMC/S-T 35/2.0 is a quite good wide angle. The 35/3.5 looks like a cheap
beginner lens and is not nearly as good.
I am a bit surprised by your evaluation here. Have you used a SMCT
35/3.5 in your comparison? I find the K 35/3.5 (supposedly identical
to the SMCT 35/3.5) superior to
I also think it could be a bad sample,
The lens was available for little money and as such was a beginner
lens but it still was a high grade optic. It was designed with
resolution in mind and gave very low flare once multicoated. If the
front glass has no color it may mean that this surface
Is Prodigital 2000 from Toronto a good place to buy the istD? They
offer the body + lens + grip + card for 1999. US
Andre
--
It probably needs a CLA. Has it been done recently? If so, the
problem is elsewhere.
Andre
--
It's an interesting thought, but what I perceive to be blue might
actually [be] what you perceive to be green. (...) And how would one
actually prove any of this?
Ryan
I don't think it's empirically testable. If two people attach the same
label to the same experience then that is all we can
It probably needs a CLA. Has it been done recently? If so, the
problem is elsewhere.
It was cleaned and adjusted within the past 18 months.
Then Graywolf is right. And its repair will cost less than a
complete CLA. Find a technician that doesn't charge a high minimum
price for repairs,
I would be concerned about warranty issues from this sort of sale.
Malcolm
I think the key words for a valid warranty are original bill (from
a recognized seller). Any unfilled international warranty is a
useless piece of paper if you don't have the original bill or it is
not stamped by the
1 - 100 of 783 matches
Mail list logo
