You argue pro cat stew. So I don't take you seriously.
Tim Typo Mostly Harmless ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Savage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 6:23 PM Subject: Re: Stupid lens survery On 9/4/07, Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But I'm not sure if I'd go the Pentax route again, judging from what I see > in the horison now. I love the K10D. I love my FA* 85, I'm also sure I'll > love the two fast DA* zooms. But where is the long lens lineup? The > 200/2,8 > and 300/4 will not fill the gap for me. I need something longer. A 400/ > would be a lot better. My K-500/4,5 has way too much CA to do what I > really > would like to do. In practical use it is an f:8. It is a lot better than > nothing, but far from what I'd like. And the really flexible and good > legacy > lenses are far too expensive at the moment. I know for a fact if all my kit was stolen or destroyed tomorrow, and I had to start all over again, Pentax wouldn't be my first, or second, choice. Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.3/986 - Release Date: 03.09.2007 09:31 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
