I look at posts like this and my guts tighten up. Let me translate some of those acronyms as used for lens of this class.
IF, internal focusing, means it is a fixed focus lens that instead of focusing they change the focal length, at closer distances it gets shorter. A cheaper way to build a zoom lens. AL, a molded plastic non-spherical element, instead of several glass elements. A cheaper way to build a lens. Bayonet lens hood, usually plastic, only the manufactures cheap built, expensive to buy, lens hood will work. This is not to say these are not good lenses, but I cringe every time I see a compromise in build quality flaunted as a feature. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Artur Led�chowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 7:09 AM Subject: Re: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105 > Hi, > If I were you, I'd go for 28-70 if I needed to save some money. It's really a great lens with constant aperture (a tiny bit faster than the 24-90 at the long end), > although it has no IF. On the other hand, if money weren't a problem I'd definitely go for 24-90, since it's a great lens too and it has IF and bayonet mount lens > hood. I'd avoid buying the 28-105, since, of course if i'm not mistaken, this is the lens based on the Tamron construction. I don't mean it's crap - no, it's good too > (has AL, IF and bayonet mount lens hood), but using the aperture ring is really a pain in the butt - it's very small and too hard to reach and operate comfortably. It > may be no problem with your Z-1p, since you control the aperture from the body, but if you ever mount it on MZ-5/3/S or any manual focus body, it'll be a problem. > I'd also consider Sigma 28-70 f/2,8 - its price is very attractive and the quality is pretty good:) > Greetz > Artur > ----------------- > >I'm thinking about buying a good and not too expensive "normal range" zoom > >lense to use on my Z1-p. There is the SMC-FA 28-70 mm/4,0 AL which I have > >seen. It seems to be quite good and not too pricy. There are also two newer > >lenses, both with more tele-range: > >1) SMC-FA 24-90mm f/3.5-4.5 AL [IF] and > >2) SMC-FA 28-105/3,2-4,5 AL [IF] > >At leastv here in Sweden the 24-90 is more expensive than the other two > >lenses. Is it worth the extra money? > >What is your opinion (humble of course) of these lenses? Any > >recommendations? Have you seen any test results for the new lenses? > > > >Peter Smekal > > > > -- > > Okresl Swoje potrzeby - my znajdziemy oferte za Ciebie! > [ http://oferty.onet.pl ] > - > 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 . - 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 .
