I am new to photography and this list. So please point me to the faq if
that answers it.
I can buy this lens for a reasonable price but i want to find out about
its quality before i buy it. I have a k1000 and super takumar 1.4/50mm
lens and a kiron 28-210 f/4-5.6 (whose optical quality i haven't
I just got the Oct 2001 editionexcellent tests on the Pentax 31/1.8 LTD
(did very well), Pentax 200/4 FA Macro and Pentax 28-105/3.2-4.5 FA.
I missed the August and September 2001 issues. Can someone email me the list
of lenes tested in these issues? I would greatly appreciate it.
After a couple of weeks of using the Pentax 6x7 I feel inclined to make a
couple of comments. Some positive, some not :)
1) This is a fun camera to use handheld. I still like the clunk noise it makes.
I was mindful to keep the shutter speed high [1/250 with the 45mm lens] just to
be on
Hi too,
Bob Walkden wrote:
Hi,
no - that's Artist...
My favourite definition of art: Lying with style - Ki
Longfellow Stanshall (widow of Vivian)
mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget
Hi,
Frits J. Wüthrich wrote:
I see 1.4X-S and 1.4X-L converters on the web and was wondering what the
differences are.
S converters are optimised for lenses up to (and including)
300mm, L converters for longer ones.
mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:12:58 -0700 (PDT), Juan J. Buhler wrote:
Ouch. That means a *really* tiny viewfinder then...
No, not really, that depends on magnification factor in the viewfinder
optical system just as much as the actual covered area itself.
Regards, Jan van Wijk
??? IS this a typo?
Thanks,
Ed
http://lightandsilver.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 2:47 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Chasseur d'Images Pentax Lens Ratings
snip
and
Which is exactly why, a couple of years ago, we had a thread on the utility of
DOF and I said then I thought it a waste of time on 35mm cameras. If you think
you can judge depth of field accurately when you're stopped way down, as one
usually is shooting macro, I believe, sir, you kid
But, as one other member said some time ago, it's useful for evaluating the
amount of fuzziness in out-of-focus areas. The opposite of DOF, in other
words.
-Original Message-
From: John Coyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: den 24 oktober 2001 09:22
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE:
Erik Nordin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But, as one other member said some time ago, it's useful for evaluating the
amount of fuzziness in out-of-focus areas. The opposite of DOF, in other
words.
Right. I use the depth-of-field preview more as a quality-of-bokeh preview. I
know the background's
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 03:24 PM, Ryan Charron wrote:
It just does, that's all there is to it!
No Canon or Nikon even comes close.
While I agree about the 645n's superiority over every device made by
Canon and Nikon, I must respectfully voice the opinion that THE PENTAX
67 KICKS
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 03:18 PM, Amita Guha wrote:
http://www.picturesofmyfinger.com/aboutme.htm
That is one of the funniest URLs I've ever seen.
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't
mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob Walkden wrote:
no - that's Artist...
My favourite definition of art: Lying with style - Ki
Longfellow Stanshall (widow of Vivian)
Viv Stanshall, one of the greats. Just heard a Public Radio interview with Niel
Innes a couple of weeks ago. Gonna have
Someone ought to call whoever Canon buy their cheap 28-80 from and let
'em know. :)
Seriously, does anyone believe that Canon make their cheapies?
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
This thread demonstrates the principle of FLDSAC.
First Liar Doesn't Stand a Chance. Grin
Len
---
-Original Message-
From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 5:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Real DOF the Pentax K1000
Erik Nordin
Hi,
On 21 Oct 2001 at 1:26, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Any of you all use equipment other than
Pentax at times?
I use:
- Kiev88 with 3.5/45, 2.8/80 and 2.8/150.
(also have a 4.5/300 and 3.5/65, for sale)
- Ricoh 500GX rangefinder
- the family's Canon Prima Mini II
Gabor
-
This message is from
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 06:46 PM, Brian Campbell (PM) wrote:
Landscapes? Night shots? anything where you have time
to compose and consider your exposure? The bigger neg
wins out everytime.
Right on. Now that I've got this SprintScan 120, I'm shooting
EVERYTHING with my 67, and
Sorry Cotty,it was a typo i meant 70 not 90 but
it was an exceptional day,one i get once in a while.
Helps make the payments nudge nudge
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 23:19:54 +0100
To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
Hi,
Mark Roberts wrote:
Viv Stanshall, one of the greats. Just heard a Public Radio interview with Niel
Innes a couple of weeks ago. Gonna have to break out my old Bonzo albums now.
Neil (i before e except after the N in Neil...) was in NY
recently and will be in Chicago soon, I think. See
Thanks for the response Bob
Yes, Steve McCurry was the guy ... and his grip did look similar to the
Pentax Grip M you mention. But, from what I could see, the grip protruded
down from the right side of the camera rather than the center of the camera.
The tv report showed him taking
The wife and I are taking our last camping trip of the year this weekend.
We'll be at the Linville Falls Campground near, needless to say, Linville
Falls. Hopefully there'll still be some fall colors left in the lower
areas. I hope to be able to shoot some film at Linville Falls, Grandfather
Bob Rapp wrote:
From my experience, the K35 f2.0 is sharper than the M/A f2s. The K3.5 is
the sharpest of the manual focus lenses and the auto focus FA 35 f2.0 AL is
reported to knock that marvellous lens over.
The FA is very nice in my limited experience of it.
I had an M 35/2 for a while
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 03:24 PM, Ryan Charron wrote:
It just does, that's all there is to it!
No Canon or Nikon even comes close.
While I agree about the 645n's superiority over every device made by
Canon and Nikon, I must respectfully voice the
In a message dated 10/24/2001 8:32:56 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 03:24 PM, Ryan Charron wrote:
It just does, that's all there is to it!
No Canon or Nikon even comes close.
While I agree about the 645n's
This sounds like Nikon users saying their 28-80 F4-5.6
is the sharpest cause it's nikon.
--- Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Someone ought to call whoever Canon buy their cheap
28-80 from and let
'em know. :)
Seriously, does anyone believe that Canon make their
cheapies?
mike wilson wrote:
See the website:
http://www.neilinnes.org/
All my albums burgled last year (again) so I'm starting the
collection once more. Looking for the Alberts/Bonzos/Temperance
Seven album.
Got it. Want a tape?
My Brother Makes the Noises for the Talkies
--
Mark Roberts
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/24/2001 8:32:56 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 03:24 PM, Ryan Charron wrote:
It just does, that's all there is to it!
No Canon or Nikon even comes close.
Well, I don't think I can afford *not* to do digital proofs now...the
client forwarded the link to friends and family yesterday and I've
already got 2 bookings and a couple of orders.
This is good.
So I need to figure out a way to get better b+w scans. Does anyone have
experience with that
Interesting article Juan. Photographing people is something that always
interested me. However, I am not quite too sure how to approach people and
just take their photos. Do I just fire away without even composing a
little bit of my photograph or simply pretend I'm taking someone else's
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds
Subject: Re: Funny OT: Canon ad
Someone ought to call whoever Canon buy their cheap 28-80 from
and let
'em know. :)
Seriously, does anyone believe that Canon make their cheapies?
Who else would be willing to?
William Robb
-
This message is
Amita,
I enjoyed your web pages -- both the funny and serious
ones. Some very interesting links.
I see you've visited the Bronx Botanical Gardens.
Between the gardens and the zoo, my wife and I never
tire of the photo opportunites presented by the Bronx
only 15 minutes from home.
Steve
tom wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PM, Ryan Charron wrote:
It just does, that's all there is to it!
No Canon or Nikon even comes close.
While I agree about the 645n's superiority over every device made by
Canon and Nikon, I
tom wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PM, Ryan Charron wrote:
It just does, that's all there is to it!
No Canon or Nikon even comes close.
While I agree about the 645n's superiority over every device made by
Canon and Nikon, I
I've always admired the K2 as the ultimate of the Pentax K's. It has a
feeling of solidity and a weight that bothers some but pleases me. Like the
KX, it has DOF preview and MLU, but in some other respects is specified even
better. For its time it is a fine manual camera - and quite useful
-Original Message-
From: Mark Roberts [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 7:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Juan J. Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote:
Hi all,
Just a quick news.
MZ-L:
Min shutter speed of 1/4000(synch 1/125), Three spot
AF(Wide and Spot), Auto picture programme with illumination,
and Pentax Function. W135.5x H92x L63mm, 400g. JPY67,000,
released in late November
SMC Pentax FA Zoom 28-90/3.5-5.6:
Min distance 0.4m,
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 12:25 PM, tom wrote:
The 67 is too fat and slow to catch a 645n in order to kick it's ass...
Slow and fat, eh? Beware of men brandishing 67s and wearing Team Canada
hockey jerseys, Tom, cuz I forsee a beating in your future. ;)
-Aaron
-
This message is
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 10:12 AM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds
Seriously, does anyone believe that Canon make their cheapies?
Who else would be willing to?
Tamron and Sigma.
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.
I agree the 67 is slow and fat, especially with a
300mm F4 ( or Aaron ) stuck to it, but if it did catch
a 645n or any other camera for that matter it would
definitly kick A$$ :)
--- tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 03:24 PM, Ryan
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 09:12 PM, Chris Brogden wrote:
Ok, since everyone's asking... :) $580 CAN for the body, 150/2.8,
90/2.8
leaf shutter, AE prism finder, folding waist-level finder, and a wood
grip
with a coldshoe on top.
Holy crap. I nominate this as the PDML deal of
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 12:58 PM, tom wrote:
BTW, what's the best film for taking pictures of various things?
Kodak, because Fuji film is too green and Agfa film is too orange. The
yellow and red of the Kodak film is just right.
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
I'm still green with envy and I thought I got a good deal on my 6x7...
Norm
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Damn, now I keep thinking of what I paid for my 67!
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 03:08 AM, David A. Mann wrote:
2) It's a real pain trying to compose a portrait-orientation shot with
the waist-
level finder, especially when you need to do it _quickly_ to shoot that
waterfall
before your cruise boat moves away, just after they gave
Hi,
On 24 Oct 2001 at 9:22, tom wrote:
I had an M 35/2 for a while which I loved. Colors were a bit muted,
but b+w was fantastic.
Could you describe these muted colors in detail?
I haven't noticed anything like this so far with M lenses...
(Just bought the M2/35.)
Gabor
-
This message is
Hi,
On 24 Oct 2001 at 10:29, Robert Soames Wetmore wrote:
I've always admired the K2 as the ultimate of the Pentax K's.
It is.
However, I keep hearing that its (Seiko-sha?) metal focal plane
shutter induces a fair amount of vibration (...)
Can anyone confirm that this is true? Is
Gabor,
I've always wanted to hear from someone who actually used a Kiev88 and get
their opinion since I have frequently considered purchasing one. I've often
heard, though, of serious reliability issues with them and wanted to get the
input of someone with hands-on experience.
I'd love to have
or now, it would seem. Little
Regards,
/\/\ick...
++
||
__/) Mick Maguire |
| Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
(_/) ICQ: 48609010 |
\/ |
\
Bruce Dayton wrote:
L could mean LAST
Or even Lousy. :)
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
This came up on the DPReview site:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0110/01102401pentaxdslrnomore.asp
--Mark
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at
No typo. The Pentax lens is FA 28-105/3.2-4.5. It's the new one.
Robert
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
I believe it means LATE
Bruce Dayton
- Original Message -
From: Robert Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: New products and No-production
Bruce Dayton wrote:
L could mean LAST
Or even Lousy. :)
-
This
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Paul Jones wrote:
Its a strange lense, the bokeh does look like fog.
It's called Industar glow.
:-)
j
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users'
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote:
Looking at the specifications -
Magnification 0.8x with 50-mm lens set to infinity
and -1.0 m(-1)
So that *does* mean a tiny viewfinder. Keep in mind that not all the
24x36 original frame is shown, so you start
Maybe L as in LX?
Bruce Dayton
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: New products and No-production
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 10:47 AM, Takehiko Ueda wrote:
MZ-L:
L
If your need is so great, fine. Lie to us. We won't know the
difference. You will. The question is then, Will it matter
to you that you lied to show off your shot? I can't answer
this. Only you can.
Regards,
Bob...
My, Shel was right - it *did* get nasty, didn't it?
I don't need to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No typo. The Pentax lens is FA 28-105/3.2-4.5. It's the new one.
I was told this one wouldn't be available in the U.S
tv
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote:
Looking at the specifications -
Magnification 0.8x with 50-mm lens set to infinity
and -1.0 m(-1)
So that *does* mean a tiny viewfinder. Keep in mind that not all the
24x36 original frame is shown, so you start
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Maybe L as in LX?
List price is about $US550, it's got a lower shutter speed and flash
sync, plus smiley-face mode.
This ain't the big one.
I wonder if the designation means that there's no more MZ-number series
bodies, and we'll see a line of slant topped MZ-Letter
C'mon, guys, I'm trying to stir up endless speculation about the
features, specs and price of this camera from only its name and
dimensions. You're really disappointing me!
-Aaron
;)
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow
Rob Studdert wrote:
The new Nikon 4000 has a full roll batch scan capability FWIW.
Thanks...I've got to decide if I really want to spend hours scanning my
negs...
I still can't send you mail directly, and that was with a second smtp
server.
tv
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail
Hmmm. I must have missed this one..
Thanks,
Ed
http://lightandsilver.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 1:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Chasseur d'Images Pentax
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, William Robb wrote:
Here is the sequence:
1) Set the camera to 1/8 second. Do not use a different speed
when using the leaf shutter. Not ever.
Never.
Oops, too late. I've already tried it at several different speeds, as it
didn't specify anything about tht in the
But I don't really do landscapes. People. And that's 35 mil all over it.
Rambling,
Cotty
I dunno, I LOVE shooting people in 6 x 7. Since I got my 67II,
I almost don't like using 35mm anymore. Formal portraits,
casual portraits, kids portraits, are S much better
handled by the 6x7
Lets not speculate and wait and see what this beast
really is. but 3 point AF 1/4000 and 1/125 sync sounds
like Pentax is going after the Max 5
--- tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Maybe L as in LX?
List price is about $US550, it's got a lower shutter
speed and flash
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting article Juan. Photographing people is something that always
interested me. However, I am not quite too sure how to approach people and
just take their photos. Do I just fire away without even composing a
little bit of my photograph
Sounds like combining the ZX-7 with the ZX-3.
Bruce Dayton
- Original Message -
From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: New products and No-production
Lets not speculate and wait and see what this beast
really
At 02:33 PM 10/24/01 -0700, you wrote:
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Maybe L as in LX?
List price is about $US550, it's got a lower shutter speed and flash
sync, plus smiley-face mode.
This ain't the big one.
Sounds like it might be a successor to the MZ-7.
That would make the MZ-S a successor to
I think the part about shutter vibration is complete bullsh*t. Perhaps the
metal shutter vibrates a *little* more than the cloth shutter of the other
K cameras. But enough to negate the benefits of locking up the mirror???
Hogwash.
[...]
Between its mass and mirror lock-up it produces *very*
I must have been asleep at the computer, but I missed the original thread
on the MZ-L. Was this for real or is it one of our PDML creations? What
was the source?
DG
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions.
As required, here are the Cd'I last issues :
October (#237):
- Konika M-Hexanon 50mm f/1,2 ltd
* SMC-Pentax FA 200mm f/4 macro IF ED
* SMC-Pentax FA 28-105mm f/3,2-4,5 AL IF
* SMC-Pentax FA 31mm f/1,8 AL Ltd
November (#238):
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/2,8 L IS USM
- Leica Tri-Elmar-M 28-35-50mm f/4
Robert Soames Wetmore wrote:
I think we also should include the vibration because our heart beats when
the camera is hand holded and... Alexandre Suaide
I'm not sure if you meant this as a joke, but I actually have this very
problem. It is a major factor in shooting hand-held.
I haven't heard about that Sigma 24-90/2.8 anywhere before.
If it's any good I may be screaming amateur soon ;)
-- Original Message --
As required, here are the Cd'I last issues :
snip
July-August 2001 (#235):
- Nikkor AF 28-80mm f/3,3-5,6 G
- Nikkor AF 70-300mm f/4-5,6 G
* SMC-Pentax FA
A MZ-3 with smiley face mode, 'cringes'
--- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds like combining the ZX-7 with the ZX-3.
Bruce Dayton
- Original Message -
From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: New
Reliable enough, see below
From: Takehiko Ueda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: New products and No-production
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all,
Just a quick news.
MZ-L:
Min shutter speed of 1/4000(synch 1/125), Three spot
AF(Wide and Spot), Auto picture
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 02:58 PM, Brendan wrote:
Lets not speculate and wait and see what this beast
really is.
No, no, SPECULATE AWAY!
There's nothing more fun than re-reading the speculative threads after
the product has actually come out. :)
-Aaron
-
This message is from the
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 01:21 PM, Cotty wrote:
I take your point, Brian. I'm afraid all my portraits are 'casual' - I
don't think I've used a tripod for one in almost 20 years!
I don't regularly use a tripod with my 67. The camera does not demand
it any more than your 35mm,
On Wednesday, October 24, 2001, at 02:17 PM, John Francis wrote:
I don't need to lie to you to get my images shown anywhere.
But if it matter to you that much, don't worry - I'd be quite
happy to have all my images removed from the Pentax gallery.
I don't think I'll bother to submit to any
Hello Mike,
I would be pleased to meet you wife when you are in Paris.
Unfortunately, at the date of today, you share a specific parisan problem
with thousands of people coming to Paris and looking for exactly the same
thing as you're looking for : a place to live, not too expensive, not too
On second thought, I think it's a misprint and they were referring to the
24-70/2.8
I haven't heard about that Sigma 24-90/2.8 anywhere before.
If it's any good I may be screaming amateur soon ;)
-- Original Message --
As required, here are the Cd'I last issues :
snip
July-August 2001 (#235):
I notice Paal hasn't weighed in with his comments or inside information on
this new body. If this is to be introduced in November maybe there is a
photo out there of it.
DG
At 03:26 PM 10/24/01 -0400, you wrote:
Reliable enough, see below
From: Takehiko Ueda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Sorry, typing error. Shoud have typed :
- Sigma AF 24-70mm f/2,8 EX DF aspherical
I was thinking of the Pentax one when typing...
Cyril
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de Mark Roberts
Envoyé : mercredi 24 octobre 2001 21:24
À : [EMAIL
John Francis wrote:
My, Shel was right - it *did* get nasty, didn't it?
I don't need to lie to you to get my images shown anywhere.
But if it matter to you that much, don't worry - I'd be quite
happy to have all my images removed from the Pentax gallery.
I don't think I'll bother to
Never mind - if I want to send in something shot on non-Pentax
equipment I know that I'll have to lie about it. Doesn't worry me.
I find that rather sad.
:-(
Cotty
___
Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MacAds traffic to [EMAIL
I don't care for it, but I'm sure someone here will. The title of the auction
says f3.5, but the lens is a f2.5, and is described so too.
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1289309618
Just thought it'd be good if someone from the list got it...
j
=
--
Juan J. Buhler
Hi all,
Here is brief translation of the official press release
for the coming MZ-L
**
Small and light weight AF SLR
PENTAX MZ-L
Applying to various photo-shooting styles, from beginners
to high amateur
Asahi Optical Co., Ltd. (President: Mr Fumio Urano) will
start
Now we know the L is for Lite
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Takehiko Ueda
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 3:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Press Release for MZ-L
Hi all,
Here is brief translation of the official press
At 23:47 24.10.2001 +0900, you wrote:
Pentax has officially announced its stopping producing 6M
CCD digital SLR. It's because the price will be very high to
achieve the quality level which Pentax is pursuing and
therefore the product will not be very competitive.
Practically this means : those
87 matches
Mail list logo
