----- Original Message ----- From: "Roland Mabo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Pentax <--> Canon
> Pentax lenses are, by tradition, small and compact. > It's expensive to make small lenses with large apertures, but Pentax has > done better here than the competiton. Pentax 28 to 50mm lenses has a 49mm > filter thread (Nikon has 52mm). The Pentax 28-105 f/4-5.6 used 58mm and the > 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 uses 58mm also (and it has IF and a hood). Have you seen the new Minolta 24-105/3,5-4,5 AL IF D? That's quite a compact lens, has very useful focal range and excellent sharpness. Mount it on a Dynax 7 and you'll get a very light and capable kit, smaller and more ergonomical than many Pentax kits... Actually the only Pentax kit that matches it in terms of combination of weight, ergonomy and features is IMHO the MZ-S + SMC FA 24-90/3,5-4,5 (I mean only AF bodies of course). And while both lenses are made of plastic, the Minolta zoom is IMHO more solid than both FA 28-105 and 24-90 (at least that's my impression) I guess it took > time for Pentax to make the most compact 28-105 on the market with such a > wide aperture. Nikon's 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 uses a 65mm filter thread, the "el > cheapo and plastique le chic" 28-100 'G' uses 62mm. Nikon's 28-70 f/2.8 uses > 77mm filter thread, Pentax 28-70 f/2.8 uses 67mm. C'mon, don't tell me it takes years to make a 1/2EV faster lens while maintaining the same filter thread. If so, that's either because of inability to maintain competitive production level or because of poor analysis of the market demands. Now, it is important for > Pentax to make compact lenses with small filter threads. It's hard to make > them with a wide aperture too, but - again - Pentax has done this better > than the competition. Nikon and Canon doesn't care about making compact > lenses, but Pentax do. Small size and low weight are key values for Pentax, > and also by many Pentax photographers. I agree that small size is one of the important values. However, it's much more about the weight of a lens than of its filter thread diameter - the latter has never been a factor of any importance for me, as well as any person I know (not just Pentaxians), when deciding what lenses to buy... Weight, on the other hand, has been such a factor, although the most decisive one is always the price-to-sharpness ratio. > How do you know that? Have you ever heard of a MZ-5n breaking into pieces > because of the lens in use? I have not. I haven't even heard such a thing > about Canon's all-plastic entry level bodies... No I haven't, although I remember my fear of it, when I mounted an old m42 300/4 lens (Sonnar, I guess...) on my MZ-5n > Anyway, according to Pentax - the bottom plattern of the MZ-5n is metal > (underneath the plastic cover). Pentax refers the skeleton has a "hybrid" of > plastic and metal. That is - both metal and plastic is used, but metal is > used in the most important places. A chain is as strong as its weakest link... Regards Artur
