Shipping from Israel (EMS, with proper insurance and tracking) is about USD 25... But let it not be the obstacle.
On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 8:14 PM, P.J. Alling <[email protected]> wrote: > Boris, let me think about what I might need for samples. Much as I'd like > to take you up on the 17-70, the shipping from Israel would probably negate > the great price. The 24-60 looks like a very good lens, but I'm already > using an A 24mm f2.8 as an e-35mm equivalent. I was really looking for > something a little wider than the 20mm ~e-28mm on the K-5II. > > > On 10/29/2016 1:30 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >> >> In my experience, >> >> Pentax (which by the way is 16-50/2.8, not 16-55/2.8, as you put it) >> fast lens is the best in terms of color, convenience (weather sealing >> may come in handy) and it is just 1 mm wider than others. It has >> distortion and it is not very sharp towards the borders at wide zoom >> settings. It has this SDM motor and it is your call, whether you take >> this issue seriously or just dismiss it. >> >> Tamron seems to be very sharp, but I have witnessed it on Canon APS-C >> camera, which also means that extreme corners are just cropped out due >> to difference in crop factor between Canon and Pentax APS-C cameras. >> >> I have Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 - very first version. I think that it in >> terms of picture quality it gives probably 90% of Pentax has to offer >> for fraction of the price. The color rendering is different though... >> >> Actually, Peter, if you so desire, I can send you some RAW files shot >> with both Pentax 16-50 and Sigma 17-70. Name the conditions, I would >> see if I have proper samples for you. >> >> As well, I can enable you with Sigma very cheaply. >> >> There are other options out there, such as Sigma 24-60/2.8 that I can >> also enable you with. It is roughly the size of Pentax 16-50, fast and >> really very good. It is full frame too, so if you see a full frame >> Pentax camera in the future, it can be an advantage over proper APS-C >> lenses. >> >> On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:06 PM, P.J. Alling <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus >>> Varafocal, >>> (Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies most of my >>> needs, >>> but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal makes me think that >>> sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial processing for my brain >>> to >>> keep track of stop down metering, re-framing and refocusing, which leads >>> to >>> a lot more missed shots than I'm happy with. Swapping to the 20-35 and >>> back, is sometimes necessary at very inconvenient times which also leads >>> to >>> missed shots. >>> >>> It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite some >>> time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C. The K-5II is >>> more >>> than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better than most needs. >>> A >>> more identical backup body is what I'm more likely to get than an actual >>> full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another K-5[II(s)], or K3 thought the >>> latter >>> would have some of the same problems as using the K20D as backup, though >>> the >>> K5II hasn't failed me yet. >>> >>> So I'm looking at APS-C lenses. >>> >>> I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on >>> reviews. >>> >>> Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new. >>> >>> Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still >>> available >>> new. >>> >>> Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version still >>> available new. >>> >>> Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new. >>> >>> Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new. >>> >>> >>> All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most >>> expensive, >>> the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of course it's only >>> really available used. I like the idea of the 17-70 as it would cut down >>> on >>> the necessity of changing lenses when things are moving fast. >>> >>> I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and >>> the >>> two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 has >>> anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically crap? >>> Vice Versa? >>> >>> It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick up >>> something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, this >>> isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be pretty >>> good, >>> and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what the f*#k was >>> that >>> guy talking about this is pretty horrible. You guys have real world >>> experience, what is it. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve >>> immortality through not dying. >>> -- Woody Allen >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >> >> >> > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > 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. -- Boris -- 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.
