Paul, stop it man, yer scarin' me....
> Chris,
>
> Here are the comments I've collected on the 28/3.5. Because it is so
"slow"
> compared to most 28s, it is in little demand and can be readily found for
> less than $100. So don't feel compelled to buy the EBay article; with a
> little Web searching, you can find this lens anytime, in most any
> condition.
>
> Consider also its predecessor, the 28/3.5 SMC, regarded by many as the
best
> 28 that Pentax ever made.
>
> Modern Photography wrote that the M28/3.5 (like the M40/2.8 and M100/2.8)
> had twin focusing guides, all-aluminum focusing helicoids, and a strong
> autodiaphragm. (This solid build probably accounts for the outsized
> weight.) They cautioned that you should watch out for excessive
lubrication
> of the focusing helicoids. (Certain M lens models appear to have been
> overlubricated at the factory.) The editors found minimal barrel
distortion
> or spherical aberration. There was no vignetting beyond f/4.5 and no
> lateral color shift.
>
> Now for two personal opinions:
>
> Garjan van Oosten: "If you really need an almost distortion-free wide
angle
> lens, go for the 3.5/28 K or M. Distortion is under 0.5% for both."
>
> Shel Belinkoff: "I used the SMC-M 28mm f/3.5 lens to take my single most
> beautiful photograph. I had this enlarged to 12x18 and have it hanging
over
> the mantle, where it is a source of continued pleasure. There's detail in
> it close to the grain size (Konica VX 400, probably). I bought mine at a
> local pawn/consignment/second-hand place as a small, light back-up lens
but
> I'm sure I'm going to be using it a lot more than I first anticipated. I'd
> read that the earlier K-series 28/3.5 was the best but this one is
> certainly no slouch."
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 14:29:28 -0600 (CST)
> From: Chris Brogden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Pentax-M 28mm f3.5 question
>
> There's one of these up on eBay right now at
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1220461760
>
> Has anyone used this lens before? How different is it from the
> M28/2.8? My spec sheet says that the 3.5 version is a 6/6 design (the
> 28/2.8 is a 7/7) and yet is a heavier lens than the 28/2.8 (180g
> vs. 156g). It's only half a millimeter longer, and the rest of the specs
> are the same, so what gives?
>
> chris
>
> Paul Franklin Stregevsky
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> W: (703) 834-4648
>
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
