The difference between a Rolex and a Timex is that you can beat off potential muggers with a Rolex and you won't damage the watch, whereas with a Timex no-one wants to mug you.
B On 22 Jul 2013, at 21:02, <[email protected]> wrote: > So its a status lens? > > I mean a Rolex still tells time like a Casio or Timex, so its mainly a status > thing, but can the 1.8 be that much better than a 2.8? > > Reminds me of when I was searching for stereo components many moons ago for > $XXXX I could get a very good sounding system but for many times that amount > I could get a highly recommended system that I honestly couldn't hear the > difference in sound quality. > > > Kenneth Waller > http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darren Addy" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8 > > >> Similar discussion for Rolex vs Timex. Mostly similar reasons for >> owning both the Rolex and the A* 135mm f1.8. >> >> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Bill <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 22/07/2013 12:38 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> Can it really be worth $2569 ? >>> Save yourself $2400.00 and go for the f/2.8. >>> >>> bill > > > -- > 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.
