It is varifocal. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California "Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film."
----- Original Message ----- From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 4:15 PM Subject: RE: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90? > 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 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andre Langevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 7:06 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90? > > > > > > From adphoto (then me): > > > > >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? > > > > >the vivitar was noticeability more saturated through the entire range. > > >Especailly at around f3.5 and F11. But from what i have heard > > that lens was > > >a hit and miss affair. Some were good and some were not. However > > the pentax > > >wins out because i can use it for sunsets and when ever the sun is low in > > >the sky and for its range. > > > > Could the difference in saturation be caused by a slight difference > > in exposure (because of diaphragm margin of error)? > > > > Other PDMLers with similar experience? > > > > Andre > > -- > > >
