----- Original Message -----
From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 1:29 AM
Subject: Re: Odp: My impressions of the MIR 20mm f3.5 M42 lens; a Super
Tak20/4.5 for sale
> thinking about getting a MIR 47K 20/2.5. Do you have any thoughts about
> that lens?
>
From what I've heard the f/3,5 version is better. Can't find the post
with that opinion right now (probably lost during system reinstall). On the
other hand, f/2,5 version is said to be avaible with Pentax K mount while
f/3,5 isn't (at least in Poland) and you gain about one aperure stop. It's
possible to convert the lens into K mounted - that's the way I bought mine -
it's a great improvement for me as I find working with a K/M42 a pain in the
neck.
Regardles of the conversion I still have to stop the aperture down prior
to shooting if I like to focus on the wide open. Haven't got any pictures
with it (except for one that doesn't show anything) but the build quality
looks fine. It is MC MIR-20M 3.5/20 so it's multicoated but the coating is
worse than Pentax one (which is _SUPER_ MC so no doubts about that ;-) -
some seriou flare can be seen allready without taking pictures while playing
against the light source. Mine doesn't have CCCP nor Russia imprinted on it
but it looks as a newer one, and sadly it didn't came in a hard leather case
(as I suspected Russian lens to) but in a soft case with a hard case for
filters which looks as a case for something else in fact. Three rear mounted
filters were included: UV, yellow and green. I haven't found out yet if
presence of any is necessary for right focusing as in case of some other
Russian wides, so I keep the UV on. Works without problems with my MX and
MZ-M.
Don't know if I have been of any help but that's what I know.
Maciej Marchlewski
-
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 .
