Or perhaps I'm just crazy.
I think you hit the thumb squarely with the hammer there...
Peter Jordan wrote:
There is something strangely satisfying in spending more than the cost
of a replacement on a CLA.
A psychologist would be able to explain better, but it's something to
do with the bond that forms between a man and his (delete as
applicable) LX / MX / K50mm f/1.4 / M85 mm f/2 .......
Or perhaps I'm just crazy.
Peter
----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA
Probably not, you should be able to find one that doesn't need a CLA
for less than the CLA would cost.
-Adam
Barry Rice wrote:
Hey Folks,
I just found an old pentax M 50/2 lens. I've already got a Pentax
M50/1.4
and an F 50/2.8 macro.
This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it
would be
even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any
secrets
about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or
anything like
that?
B
Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
Invasive Species Specialist
Global Invasive Species Initiative
The Nature Conservancy
V: 530-754-8891
http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
