I spent a month working in Mexico City. I wanted to wander the city as inconspicuously as I could, and I wanted to get beyond the tourist areas. I was able to do this. Although my ancestors are all European, I'm not out of place among hispanics. But I wanted to carry an inconspicuous camera that I could put in a pocket of my cargo pants. So I went with the M 40/2.8 and an MX. It was a nice combination. I think the *istD and the old 40 or the new one would also serve quite nicely.
> Bars. > > Rob Studdert wrote: > > >On 3 Feb 2005 at 18:27, Peter J. Alling wrote: > > > > > > > >>All of which is true, but it's very small and has an aperture ring. I > >>like it on a black MX, (sob), for discrete > >>photography in certain venues using a fast B&W film. > >> > >> > > > >My A50/2.8 tends to be my smallest, most discrete lens now, of course it's > >larger than the M40/2.8 but it's far easier to use and the image quality is > >excellent as you know. What certain venues would necessitate that you to use > >a > >camera and lens kit that looks like a toy? > > > > > >Rob Studdert > >HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > >Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > >UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > >Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > 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 > >
