It seems as if we Pentax junkies have been getting criticized lately by the "working photographers" and the "true" photographers (i.e., the "dedicated", "serious", "true" image-makers, as opposed to us rather pathetic Pentax equipment lovers), simply because we like to discuss the details of the various pieces of Pentax "stuff" that's out there.
Well, I don't want to criticize the "serious" image-makers who either may simply want to just get the "damned job" done, or instead may want to dwell upon all the subtle ins and outs of photographic images (and may the equipment be damned, full lens-speed ahead). They are certainly more than welcome here on the PDML (even though discussions on images, film, processing, printing, manipulation, etc., can be carried on on ~any~ photographic forum, since they are not Pentax-specific). However, I would just like to point out that this ~is~ the ~PENTAX~ Discussion Mailing List, and therefore that this is the ~most~ proper place for us to discuss all the various and sundry nuances, trivia, and minutia of all the various weapons in the Pentax arsenal (or toys in the Pentax toybox), even if we do it "ad nauseam" (i.e., "enough to make a working photographer puke"). So, now can we get a discussion going on the serial numbers of the early and late models of the M 50/2, and their effect on handling, cosmetic appearance, focus feel, looks, weight, balance, and bokeh? <g> Fred - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
