> The article/website says: > >>On the lens front, gone are the FA 24-90/3.5-4.5, FA* 28-70/2.8, FA > 28-90/3.5-5.6, FA 28-105/4-5.6, FA* 80-200/2.8, FA 80-320/4.5-5.6, K > Reflex 400-600/8-12, A 15/3.5, FA 20/2.8, A 20/2.8, FA* 24/2, FA* > 85/1.4, FA 135/2.8, A* 200/2.8, FA* 300/4, FA* 400/5.6, K 500/4.5, A* > 600/5.6, K Reflex 1000/11, A* 1200/8, M Reflex 2000/13.5, FA Macro > 50/2.8, FA Macro 100/2.8, FA Macro 100/3.5, FA* Macro 200/4, K > Bellows 100/4. FA Soft 85/2.8, K Shift 28/3.5, A Fisheye 16/2.8, and > F Fisheye 17-28/3.5-4.5.<< > > I will say that the following are a bad match on the istDS,... way to > front heavy for a good ergronmic combination from my personal > experiences. > FA*28-70/2.8 > FA 28-105/4-5.6 > FA*80-200/2.8 > A 15/3.5 > Not so front heavy, but still rather too big... > FA*24/2 > FA*85/1.4
Is the FA 135 f/2.8 not a good performer on DSLRs, I can't figure why they would discontinue that particular lens yet keep the 50mm f/1.4 & 35nn f/2. Regards, John John Whittingham Technician "you can't be optimistic with a misty optic" ---------- Original Message ----------- From: Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 19:09:25 -0600 Subject: Re: Pentax Has Finally Admitted... > Joe, > The article/website says: > >>On the lens front, gone are the FA 24-90/3.5-4.5, FA* 28-70/2.8, FA > 28-90/3.5-5.6, FA 28-105/4-5.6, FA* 80-200/2.8, FA 80-320/4.5-5.6, K > Reflex 400-600/8-12, A 15/3.5, FA 20/2.8, A 20/2.8, FA* 24/2, FA* > 85/1.4, FA 135/2.8, A* 200/2.8, FA* 300/4, FA* 400/5.6, K 500/4.5, A* > 600/5.6, K Reflex 1000/11, A* 1200/8, M Reflex 2000/13.5, FA Macro > 50/2.8, FA Macro 100/2.8, FA Macro 100/3.5, FA* Macro 200/4, K > Bellows 100/4. FA Soft 85/2.8, K Shift 28/3.5, A Fisheye 16/2.8, and > F Fisheye 17-28/3.5-4.5.<< > > I will say that the following are a bad match on the istDS,... way to > front heavy for a good ergronmic combination from my personal > experiences. > FA*28-70/2.8 > FA 28-105/4-5.6 > FA*80-200/2.8 > A 15/3.5 > Not so front heavy, but still rather too big... > FA*24/2 > FA*85/1.4 > > Would you be unhappy if these lenses were replaced by something > smaller, lighter, and with excellent performance? I've got DA 15- > 45/4 ED-AL sitting here on my istDS. It feels right on the camera > and is an excellent performer. More wide lenses and fast primes are > all we need. I can still use the old ones, but give Pentax a chance > to make some money by selling gear that fits with the lighter > digital cameras. They feel right. > > Regardss, Bob S. > > On 2/12/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > that it has discontinued all those lenses that we already knew > > were discontinued: > > > > http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/ > > > > Joe > > > > ------- End of Original Message ------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The information transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you have received an email in error please notify Carmel College on [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete all copies of it from your systems. Although Carmel College scans incoming and outgoing emails and email attachments for viruses we cannot guarantee a communication to be free of all viruses nor accept any responsibility for viruses. Although Carmel College monitors incoming and outgoing emails for inappropriate content, the college cannot be held responsible for the views or expressions of the author. The views expressed may not necessarily be those of Carmel College and Carmel College cannot be held responsible for any loss or injury resulting from the contents of a message. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
