RE: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-25 Thread John Coyle
Sent: Wednesday, 24 July 2013 11:20 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?) I have the 16-45, but the wobbly barrel is killing my corners randomly. In portrait the upper half tends to get soft. I have two copies of this lens. The one

RE: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-25 Thread John Coyle
2013 3:00 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?) The original FA 28-105 f4-5.6 (the power zoom one for the PZ-1) is a bit heavy, but an unknown sleeper - fine quality lens. But you'd still need a 15mm prime. Regards, Bob S. On Wed

Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-25 Thread John Francis
I agree on the quality. It's not that light a lens, though. And many folks believe that the third iteration of the 28-105 (the one with the f/3.2 max aperture, IIRC) is slightly better. On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:00:24AM -0500, Bob Sullivan wrote: The original FA 28-105 f4-5.6 (the power zoom

Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-24 Thread Zos Xavius
I have the 16-45, but the wobbly barrel is killing my corners randomly. In portrait the upper half tends to get soft. I have two copies of this lens. The one I'm using now is very good when it is sharp, but inconsistent. I would pay to have one of them tightened, but I'm afraid that it will just

Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-24 Thread steve harley
on 2013-07-24 7:19 Zos Xavius wrote I have the 16-45, but the wobbly barrel is killing my corners randomly. yeah it's an interesting compromise of a lens; i thought all the corners were soft but my point was that i had carried a zoom for a long time before almost completely switching to

Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-24 Thread Bob Sullivan
The original FA 28-105 f4-5.6 (the power zoom one for the PZ-1) is a bit heavy, but an unknown sleeper - fine quality lens. But you'd still need a 15mm prime. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:13 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2013-07-24 7:19 Zos Xavius wrote I have

16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-23 Thread Aahz Maruch
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013, Bruce Walker wrote: On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013, steve harley wrote: on 2013-07-11 19:47 Aahz Maruch wrote Congrats! Why not keep the 16-50? i'm a little torn; i have the 16-45, which is good, if not great,

Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)

2013-07-23 Thread steve harley
on 2013-07-23 13:44 Aahz Maruch wrote Steve, the other advantage of the 16-50, of course, is that you're not having to switch lenses. yes, for a couple of years a 16-45mm was my most-used lens -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to