Fair enough. However, I was wondering what the differences in general between the two lines is. I see both of them for sale, but I have no clue why one would be preferable. Any insight would be appreciated.
-----Original Message----- From: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 8:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: New K1000 owner There is no A 135mm f3.5 Isaac wrote: >I've thought about it, but I'm not sure about the extra weight. It may be a >good trade off though. You say a M. What is the difference between that and >the A? > >-----Original Message----- >From: Thibouille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 1:27 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: New K1000 owner > >Why not a couple primes? You'll get beter overall quality and they are >brighter. >Of course you'll have to carry them all. >A SMC Pentax-M 135mm 3.5 is a very good lens and is VERY cheap. > >I have a KX (higher end version of the K1000). I can tell you you will >love this camera. I even listen to mine as much as I want when no film >inside. Just because I LOVE the noise it does :) >------------------------ >Thibouille > > > > > > -- 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
