Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
Thank you for your input. It looks great as for DSLR to me either. Perhaps I shall buy one with other ebay offer (from another european seller). regards, Roman. K20D, DA 10-17mm, DA* 16-50mm, FA 50mm, DA 50-200mm, ELINCHROM, BOWENS more @ roman.blakout.net | roman.4models.info -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
Is that the re-branded Tamron lens? I've got the Tamron version and I've never been satisfied with it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
Then it's obvious the Tamron name plate must be the source of the problem. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:15 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: Is that the re-branded Tamron lens? I've got the Tamron version and I've never been satisfied with it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: Is that the re-branded Tamron lens? I've got the Tamron version and I've never been satisfied with it. Yep, it's a Tamron. I had one and it was OK at wider focal lengths but not very good at longer ones. Stopped down and at 28mm it was quite decent. I remember showing Mike Johnston one of my BW prints made with this lens (and an ME Super)at 28mm and f/8 and enjoying his surprise when I told him what lens I used. He thought for a moment and said, Well, most lenses are pretty good at f/8! OTOH: He wouldn't have been impressed with anything at 100mm or more, no matter what the aperture. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
Funny story: I was in Savania GA using that self same 28-200mm on an
LX, (sometimes convienecne trumps quality), and managed to lose the
Pentax branded lens cap. Pissed me off, but lo what appeared before me
but the Tamron lens cap of the same size, in the middle of a sidewalk.
Well I guess you had to be there.
I sometimes wonder if the guy who lost his Tamron lens cap found mine...
On 2/25/2010 10:25 AM, Tom C wrote:
Then it's obvious the Tamron name plate must be the source of the problem.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:15 AM, John Sessomsjsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote:
Is that the re-branded Tamron lens? I've got the Tamron version and I've
never been satisfied with it.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
From: Tom C Then it's obvious the Tamron name plate must be the source of the problem. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:15 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: Is that the re-branded Tamron lens? I've got the Tamron version and I've never been satisfied with it. Unless the Pentax version is as un-suitable as the Tamron version. The Tamron label itself is not the source of my dissatisfaction with the lens. The lens is sloppy and not as good optically as I would hope a Pentax lens would be. The other lens I have not been happy with is the Pentax FAJ 18-35 which is also in my opinion a sloppy lens, although the optical quality is not quite so lacking. So, it's not brand name snobbery. That lens is, however, a source of my distrust of the Tamron label. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
I was making a joke. I found the build quality to be a little sloppy as well and I certainly wished for a zoom lock to prevent it from extending when I pointed the camera down. But I never had a real problem with it optically and many of the photos I took with it and the Pz-1p (purchased together) were displayed here and on the PUG. I often put the K7 in the car and not knowing what I'll see driving down the dirt road, the 28-200 is mounted as my grab and shoot lens, in case I come across some photogenic elk, deer, cougar, bears, wild turkeys... Tom C. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:19 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Tom C Then it's obvious the Tamron name plate must be the source of the problem. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:15 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: Is that the re-branded Tamron lens? I've got the Tamron version and I've never been satisfied with it. Unless the Pentax version is as un-suitable as the Tamron version. The Tamron label itself is not the source of my dissatisfaction with the lens. The lens is sloppy and not as good optically as I would hope a Pentax lens would be. The other lens I have not been happy with is the Pentax FAJ 18-35 which is also in my opinion a sloppy lens, although the optical quality is not quite so lacking. So, it's not brand name snobbery. That lens is, however, a source of my distrust of the Tamron label. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
Speaking from your own experience, how do you like that lense. Hope its worth to bid http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemnextitem=190374025449.html many thanks, Roman. K20D, DA 10-17mm, DA* 16-50mm, FA 50mm, DA 50-200mm, ELINCHROM, BOWENS more @ roman.blakout.net | roman.4models.info -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
At 11:13 PM +0200 2/24/10, Roman Melihhov wrote: Speaking from your own experience, how do you like that lense. Hope its worth to bid http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemnextitem=190374025449.html I bought one of them soon after buying my ZX-5N in 2000. At first I did not care too much for it (plasticky build, slow, droops, optically not the greatest, the long end is more like 180mm than 200mm), but over time I really came to like it nevertheless. If you are traveling light and you could only take one lens then this is it. I took it hiking with me and cycling, and it was great for photographing trains. I finally dropped it one summer day in 2003 while cycling around Swans Island, Maine, and that was that. I have missed it ever since. However, I don't know how good it would be for digital, since you lose the wide end. -- Steve Sharpe d...@eastlink.ca http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
Hated, (Ok, hate is too strong a word, so), despised it with film,
pretty damned good on a digital.
On 2/24/2010 4:13 PM, Roman Melihhov wrote:
Speaking from your own experience, how do you like that lense. Hope its
worth to bid
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemnextitem=190374025449.html
many thanks,
Roman.
K20D, DA 10-17mm, DA* 16-50mm, FA 50mm, DA 50-200mm, ELINCHROM, BOWENS
more @ roman.blakout.net | roman.4models.info
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: FA 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 IF
Well I generally occur with P.J. Back when I was using it on film, 8+ years ago, not having the experience I do now, I thought it was OK-to-pretty good. But even then I started scanning my film and having a bit more control. On a DSLR, I hate mounting it as opposed to a prime, but given the versatility, I have little to no complaints, especially given that I can sharpen an image in Photoshop at will. I doubt that anyone could tell that an image was taken with this lens compared to any other. Frankly I'd say you would get better than average results for a less than average price, and that makes it overall positive. Since my newly purchased DA 18-250 turned out to be a lemon, I look with chagrin on it's purchase and feel the 28-200 purchased in '98 for a lesser price, was a better expenditure of funds. Tom C. On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:23 PM, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: Hated, (Ok, hate is too strong a word, so), despised it with film, pretty damned good on a digital. On 2/24/2010 4:13 PM, Roman Melihhov wrote: Speaking from your own experience, how do you like that lense. Hope its worth to bid http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemnextitem=190374025449.html many thanks, Roman. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
