"Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 07:27:16 -0600, Mike Johnston wrote: > >> Today, sales of 135mm primes have slowed to barely a dribble.) > >Well, I have a Tamron Adaptall 135/2.8, the Takumar (Bayonet) 135/2.5, >and the well known SMC 135/2.5. The first two are going to soon be >sold, but I'll be keeping the SMC version. I find that I use the 90 >and 200 focal lengths more, but the 135 is handy to have in the bag. >Of course, much of the shooting I do doesn't allow much in the way of >zooming with your feet (auto racing), and I'm a prime lens fanatic, so >having the 135 is the only real option for me in that case.
I have the 200/4.0 for my Pentax 645 and that's roughly equivalent to a 135mm on 35mm format. I like the angle of view a lot. So much that I've considered looking for a 135 for my 35mm kit. Right now my only prime between my 100/2.8 macro and my 300/2.8 is a 200mm, which I find a bit too long for part of a 3-lens kit (with a 28mm and 43mm). -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
