This is the confusing part, if these lenses cover full frame and at a quality level standard and optimized for digital, they should have designation as such and could be used on ff film or ALL digital. Its really dumb for pentax to have a series of lenses than are designed for different formats but designated the same.
regard using lens like "hammer" I dont understand that. the A70-210 is considerably smaller and lighter than the 60-250 even though it covers FF. As for its image quality, I am not assuming anything, thats why I would like to see good scientific comparison testing on APS between A70-210 and DA60-250 and ditto for the SMCK55/1.8-2.0 and the DA55/1.4. What I would like to see is all cases of any new pentax lens that has a former similar version be tested/compared to the former roughly similar versions. Regardless of formats, costs, sizes, etc. i.e. say you want to use a Pentax APS SLR, why not compare a given new DA lens to every similar Pentax lens that would "fit" like K,M,A,F,FA versions that are similar in focal length range and speed. It would be interesting because there not a lot of good info on the vintage lenses being used on APS. I find some are fantastic on digital and some arent, but only by personal usage. We need a better collective database on such matters. JC O'Connell (mailto:[email protected]) "Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom" - Thomas Jefferson -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:33 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: DA* 60-250 at B&H Some lenses that are optimized for APS will still cover the full frame, particularly those of longer focal length. Pentax has indicated that all the DA* lenses are intended for digital APS use. See Ned Brunell's recent column ad the listing for the DA* 60-250 on the Pentax USA website. The fact that you can use a lens as a hammer doesn't make it a good hammer. Paul Paul On May 11, 2009, at 9:22 AM, JC OConnell wrote: > thats interesting, isnt DA "for aps" designation or not? > this is all too confusing from pentax. If this is a FF > lens it should be designated as such to diferentiate from aps. > > as for image quality, the A70-210 is no slouch, especially when used > on aps, thats why I wanted somebody to do some comparison testing of > the two. > > JC O'Connell (mailto:[email protected]) > "Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom" - Thomas > Jefferson > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of > Bob Sullivan > Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 7:51 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: DA* 60-250 at B&H > > > I also noticed that B&H lists the DA*60-250/4 in the full frame lens > category on their site, not the APS-C sensor. Could this be the start > of something? Regards, Bob S. > > 2009/5/10 Margus Männik <[email protected]>: >> Much more >> * image quality - sharp and nice right from full aperture >> * usability - quite fast SDM AF and weatherproofing >> * build quality - solid and quite well balanced >> >> I have had several FA zooms (including one really nice FA100-300 PZ) >> and DA50-200 (not fast, but surprisingly good image quality for the >> price). Yes, of course, I would be even happier if DA*60-250/4 would >> be less pricey (it's 1550 USD in here and our salaries are not >> comparable to US or Western European ones), but I still feel that >> money well spent.. >> >> BR, Margus >> >> >> JC OConnell wrote: >>> >>> Its "much more" what? >>> >>> JC O'Connell (mailto:[email protected]) >>> "Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom" - Thomas >>> Jefferson >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >>> Of Margus Männik >>> Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 11:05 AM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: DA* 60-250 at B&H >>> >>> >>> Well, it's also clearly stated, that no-one is forcing me or you to >>> buy it. Nevertheless, I have had my lens now for about two weeks and >>> I'm extremely satisfied. IMNSHO, it IS much more than my previous >>> long zooms. >>> >>> BR, Margus >>> (renovating hallway) >>> >>> >>> JC OConnell wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I clearly stated that the DA wouldnt be worth >>>> $1200 more to ME **IF** the image quality were the >>>> same as the A70-210/4. I didnt state the 70-210 >>>> **WAS** the same image quality as the DA60-250/4, that's still >>>> unknown >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> to me at least. I would not assume they are the same IQ nor >>>> specualate >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> which one's better IQ without serious testing and evaluation being >>>> done on them. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > 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. -- 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. -- 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.
