Or come up with an arm and a leg and get the 60-250/4. Best lens I've ever owned, and my editors agree.
Paul via phone > On Dec 9, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Charles Robinson <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Dec 9, 2013, at 16:40 , Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I don't shoot concerts often enough (and it's just for fun) to justify >>>> even the used 50-135 at KEH for $500, even though I know that's a bargain >>>> for that lens. >>> >>> Damn! KEH has a 50-135 for $500? !!! >> >> $546 actually. Sorry I exaggerated! >> >> There is also a Tamron AF 70-200 f/2.8 for $525. That would be right up my >> alley, darn it. >> >> Maybe I just need to hypnotize the wife. > > Just hypnotize the wife, Charles. Get her a new frock, some jewelry, > whatever. You need the 50-135. > > Everything I shoot is just for fun really, besides the very odd paying > gig, but I paid $800 for my DA*50-135 new a few years ago and I'd do > it again. The results justify that glass. > > -- > -bmw > > -- > 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.
