Bob: > Well you may be right. If they aren't buying any big glass > anymore, then they sure won't sell much. That is kind of a shame, > although I don't own any of those faster 300/400/500/600's.
Well, I hope I'm wrong. > In fact, I was quite surprised to hear that you have been > collecting them on ths sly. <g> Not really ~collecting~ them, Bob - <g>. Just one measly ol' A* 600/5.6, that's all. > How am I ever gonna catch up if you go off and buy that really > expensive stuff! All you have to do is to pick up an A* 1200/8. <g> Actually, I have been doing my usual buy-them-and-sell-them routine to (temporarily) collect (and cherry-pick from) a ~different~ bunch of long K-mount lenses: I currently (but temporarily) have two Vivitar Series 1 800/11 Solid Cats and (temporarily) (sorry - I really have to keep reminding myself - <g>) three VS1 600/8 Solid Cats, and I also have a very fast VS1 450/4.5 aspheric mirror (along with its VS1 2X "matched multiplier") on the way (and I suspect that this "singleton" may become a permanent resident here). Then, I also just took (probably temporary) possession of (if not my senses) a semi-complete Novoflex "Follow-Focus" gunstock system (with Noflexar 400/5.6 and 600/8 lenses). The Novoflex gear is probably just passing through, but I've only just started to play with it, so I can't say for sure yet. One interesting thing I've been noticing here so far is that I just cannot distinguish any optical difference between the two 800/11's or among the three 600/8's. I guess that's maybe a tribute to the stability of the Vivitar/ Perkin-Elmer (American-made) Solid Cat designs. But not all gear is inbound here - I just shipped out a mint K 85/1.8 (I still have one of them left here) and a mint 30/2.8 (with dedicated case, original box, and SN card), and my (only) mint K 105/2.8 will be going out probably this coming Monday. > More seriously, all the praise that the A300/2.8 is getting has > been enabling me. I just don't know how to sneak a 4 digit > purchase price past the wife. <g> I do think that the A* 300/2.8 makes a lot of sense. It's the most common of the big white/green A* monsters, and, from all accounts, is a fine lens indeed. It also seems to do very well with the A 1.4X-L and A 2X-L TC's, too. I do wonder, for example, how well the 300/2.8 with the 2X-L (effective 600/5.6) would do in comparison to my 600/5.6 (but I don't really want to know, if you know what I mean - <g>). > I've been wondering about an old 6x7 too or maybe an old 4x5 Speed > Graphic for a really big negative. I'm not gonna be lured into any of those "money pits" - <g>. No, sireee... > The issue seems to be darkroom work for larger format, and I don't > want to go there. In fact, I'm resisting buying slide scanner. I > have found that my Epson 870 (or is it 780) printer does a really > good job if I get the settings right and use the right paper. I > have been amazed by the results from a 2K by 3K or even 1K by 1.5K > jpeg. I have been a non-starter or a late-starter on these fronts, myself. No darkroom. An "el cheapo" Epson 1250 scanner (that also does surprisingly well). 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 .
