of any Pentax 135mm lens. Any Pentax 135mm you replace it with will be an improvement.
On the other hand, some have had good results using this lens as a portrait lens on 35mm
format due to it's very soft rendition.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Pentax-M 135/2.5No such thing. Pentax-M 135/3.5 perhaps, or Pentax 135/2.5 (or
again Pentax 135/3.5). Can you copy the relevant inscription
starting from "SMC"? Or check http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/.
I'm still new to Pentax gear... Yes, someone else on the
DPReview forum pointed out that I had the designation wrong. It
seems to be the original, bayonet mount with "Asahi Optical Co.
Takumar (Bayonet) 1:2.5 135mm" on the bezel. Single coated,
built in hood, 52mm filter mount.
The only defect in my lens is that the built-in hood's felt is
worn out, so I've fitted a nice old Nikkor metal HN-7 hood. It's
a perfect fit.
Have you tried http://stans-photography.info/?
Thanks, I've looked there. Seems to be a range of opinions, most
of them reasonably positive about this lens and about the
FA135/2.8 IF. I'm going to order the FA model, but I think I'll
wait until after tomorrow morning's swap meet.
Godfrey
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
--P.J. O'Rourke
