For what it's worth, I agree in regard to build quality. The build quality of K lenses is terrific as is that of the Super Taks and SMC Taks. The only recent lenses that measure up are the FA limiteds. But that doesn't mean they take the best photos. My FA 50/1.4 is a better optic than my K 50/1.4. But I do appreciate the quality of the early lenses. Paul On Jan 9, 2007, at 5:44 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
> I know this may sound like piling on, but its not, > as I have stated this many times in the past, but > there is/was a also a build quality degradation from K to M series > too, > but > not as much as from M to A. In fact, based on hundreds > (maybe thousands) of Pentax lenses I have had in my > possession over the years, the Super-Taks and Early > SMC-Taks were the pinnable of mechanical refinement > in their MF lens series IMHO. The late rubberized SMC takumars > were slightly worse, and the early K about the same as those, > then the M's even more slightly worse, and then the A series much > worse then M series. I have only had a few F or later lenses and those > were AF so I wont comment on those but there is > definately distictive mechanical quality differences > between the Pentax Man Focus lens series and it went downhill over > time > most likely for cost reasons to stay competitive. Thats > where the old saying they dont make 'em like they used > comes true....This is one of the reasons I am still upset > about the lack of DSLR full support of K/M lenses, I simply do > not like ( hate might be a better word ) the A series lenses > for this reason alone. they just feel like ^%$^$* compared to > a nice K series or Super/SMC Takumar lens. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of > Digital Image Studio > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 5:30 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: FS: Pentax SMC-A 35mm f/2 > > > On 10/01/07, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Well if you count all the ones I got and sold >> over the years in pkg. deals, at least a couple >> dozen total. I still have a few mint ones in my collection too but >> even they are crass compared to the M and K ( even M42 too ) versions >> mechanically, both the focus rings and aperture rings feel $#%$#%# >> and I am talking like new, perfect condtion lenses >> too. They just are simply not as mechanically refined >> from what I have had the opportunity to see.... >> I havent owned every singly model, no, thats why I said >> "most" instead of "all" .... How many mint condtion >> K and M lenses have you acually owned? ? ? > > Sill have two, but I've owned about ten over the years, mostly M, yes > they feel good but in reality the top end A series lenses that I have > retained are practically just as good. > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
