Alan, Having owned both the FA 135 and FA 100 macro - I agree with the focusing ring on the 135, but not on the 100. I think there are multiple aspects to nice manual focus with an AF lens. One is sloppiness/loosness, another is tactile feel (dampening) and the other is the throw or amount of turn to focus. On the FA 135, the ring is a bit loose and there is little dampening and there is very little throw amount. This makes for a clumsy manual focusing lens.
The FA 100/2.8 macro is quite different. The ring is wider, there is much less looseness, the dampening can be adjusted and the amount of throw is much greater. I wouldn't classify these two lenses together. I have since sold my FA 135 but kept my FA 100 macro in my thinning down process. Bruce Saturday, March 22, 2003, 3:23:09 PM, you wrote: >>It IS built like a tank. Execpt for two unfortunate details: The lens is >>easily scratched on the barrel, and the focusing ring is much more loose >>than on other FA primes. I like the F135/f2.8 better. The optical quality, >>however, is superb. AC> Unfortunately, Pentax "cheated" on the mechanical design of the FA135/2.8 in AC> order to achieve faster AF speed. So to the FA100/2.8. AC> regards, AC> Alan Chan AC> _________________________________________________________________ AC> Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. AC> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
