Whew!!! If that package could talk...
Cesar Panama City, Florida -----Original Message----- From: Stan Halpin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 3:39 PM Long story - I'll try to keep it short. I bought the 31mm, decided I had no reason to keep both. So I offered the 30mm for sale. Person A bought it, Person B was also interested. Person A received the lens, decided to return it and wait for one in better condition. Person A then agreed to send it directly to Person B to see if he would want it. It was sent but never arrived. After many months it just recently got back to Person A marked as "undeliverable." I will see Person A soon, I will retrieve the lens, and quite promptly send it on to Person B. If he also decides that he would rather wait for one in better condition, then I'll have it back here more permanently. Moral of the story - clearly mark your return address on packages - it may help a wayward lens find its way back into friendly hands. Stan Cesar Matamoros II wrote: > Stan, > > Why the short reunion? > > Cesar > Panama City, Florida > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stan Halpin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 12:40 AM > > Ask me again in a month. My 30mm and 31mm will be reunited, > if only for a few days, and this time I WILL take some > comparison shots. > > Stan > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>Just out of curiousity, can anyone speak from experience about the >>relative optical performance of the K30/2.8 and the FA limited 31? >> >>The 31 is of course faster, and has A and AF functions, plus you can >>buy one pretty much any time from NY dealers. I'd be tempted, but >>I've got a K30 and my tests (I haven't had much chance to SHOOT with it) >>show it to be a superb performer, decreasing the appeal of the FA 31. >> >>On a related note, I understand that M150/3.5 and M100/2.8 are generally >>held to be inferior to K150/4.0 and K105/2.8 (both screw-mount designs, >>from what I can tell). Unfortunately, the M lenses are cheapish and easy >>to come by, and the K lenses aren't. I'm particularly curious about the >>M150/3.5 as an alternative to hauling an M80-210/4.5 or K135/2.5 (better, >>but bigger) to England next year. >> >>DJE > > >
