I have the AT-X Pro series of Tokina ; 20-28, 28-70, and 80-200, all
ƒ2.8 except the 20-28, of course, it being a ƒ2.6-2.8.
I found all three to be great in 35mm film like the LX and PZ-1p. But
their mass makes them pretty slow to auto-focus and tending towards
out of focus on a digital body. In manual focus they are still great.
Joseph McAllister
Pentaxian
On Nov 16, 2008, at 12:30 , JC OConnell wrote:
I cant comment on modern third party lenses, but back in
the 80's-90's the Tamron SP and Tokina AT-X series made a few
real doozies in lengths /ranges / speeds that Pentax didnt. I wouldnt
dismiss third parties
altogether....
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
P. J. Alling
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 2:47 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Wide zoom (and not zoom) lenses redux
I have to agree with Dave, since the days of the MX and LX there hax
been little reason to use Pentax bodies other than the glass, which
has
always been reason enough IMHO. There are a few classic lenses that I
use such as the Vivitar 70-210 S1 (version 2 & 3), and a couple of
others but I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to buy modern 3rd
party
lenses. If I was going to be satisfied by them I'd switch to Nikon.
David Savage wrote:
I see no point in using Pentax bodies if you are just going to buy
3rd
party lenses.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
