On Oct 5, 2010, at 02:04 , Boris Liberman wrote:
On 10/5/2010 9:30 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
I think I will let this slide for now, even though it is a crappy
system
that makes these kinds of side-show shenanigans (worked that into a
sentence) with Pentax's top of the line DA optics.
Joe, with all due respect, I think that you might be making a
mistake here.
3x for emphasis?
Boris, the lenses will be two years old next month. If I can get them
to work with a little manual manipulation, which is free, why would I
send them to CRIS to a couple of hundred apiece to have the parts
replaced? Especially so in that I don't use them or any of my
equipment for monitory gain. I cannot afford to fix what Pentax
wrought on my fixed retiree's income.
Disappointed? Yes. Able to do anything about it? No! I'm not going to
bug Ned Bunnell in an attempt to get a free fix unless the lens fails
me again at the park this afternoon and I can't get it going once more.
<Later>
The lens behaved itself this afternoon, with the exception that I
don't think it's a very sharp lens, and that I could focus it better
manually than with AF on. (only one sample, so not certain).
--
It's not that life is too short, it's that you're dead for so long......
— Anon
Joseph McAllister
pentax...@mac.com
http://gallery.me.com/jomac
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
