On 7/22/2013 5:12 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
If you have to ask you can't afford it.
On the other hand you might want to ask Mark Cassio, (I hope I got
your name right Mark). He had parts custom made to repair his A*200
4.0 IIRC.
Close - Cassino, not Cassio... But what's one letter?
Yep - Eric
On 23/07/2013 9:42 PM, Walt wrote:
On 7/23/2013 6:27 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
No Walt, I won't
give you my 77ltd so that I have an excuse to by the 85/1.4.
I'm glad you didn't have to see me flounce out of the room and slam
the door just now.
I didn't let having a 77 stop me from buying an A*8
On 7/23/2013 1:30 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Walt wrote:
My buddy and I used to see who could get the quickest start/stop time on the
stopwatch function. Of course, that was before we learned to drink for
amusement.
Mark!
Walt, you really _do_ live in a small tow
On 7/23/2013 6:27 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
No Walt, I won't
give you my 77ltd so that I have an excuse to by the 85/1.4.
I'm glad you didn't have to see me flounce out of the room and slam the
door just now.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdm
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 02:28:52PM -0400, Bruce Walker wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> >
> > If I'm looking for fast glass in that AoV, I might as well get an
> > 85/1.4 on APS as a 135 on 24x36.
>
> The Rokinon 85/1.4 has been getting good press:
> http://slrgear.
Pretty much everything that's moderately priced these days has a plastic
body, and use a lens hood...
On 7/23/2013 2:40 PM, Zos Xavius wrote:
No SMC though and plastic body. :(
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
If I
electrolytic??? That should be electronic! I should really really proof
read these before I post them.
On 7/22/2013 11:20 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
Timex's old mechanical design was an escapement mechanism which wasn't
the most accurate, a good copy would give +/- 5 minutes a day, a bad
copy mu
Larry, check out Campmor http://www.campmor.com/ I got my last Ironman watch
from them at a very reasonable price.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Larry Colen"
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
On Mon, Jul 2
I love the metal primes too. Every so often I carefully remove my DA
35/2.8 Ltd Macro from its leather cradle and in my best Gollum voice I
say, "My Precious. My Prec--ooo-uu-s!"
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Zos Xavius wrote:
> lol bruce. I'm only being half serious here. I do love me
lol bruce. I'm only being half serious here. I do love me some metal
SMC primes though.
--
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.
Yeah, but:
All my DA* lenses have plastic bodies. Doesn't seem to hurt them.
Kirk Tuck is an idiosyncratic dude, but he does portrait work I
admire, and he loves this lens. That counts in my world.
$249! That's almost free by many folks' standards. :-)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Zos Xavi
No SMC though and plastic body. :(
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>>
>> If I'm looking for fast glass in that AoV, I might as well get an
>> 85/1.4 on APS as a 135 on 24x36.
>
> The Rokinon 85/1.4 has been getting good
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Walt wrote:
>
> My buddy and I used to see who could get the quickest start/stop time on the
> stopwatch function. Of course, that was before we learned to drink for
> amusement.
Mark!
Walt, you really _do_ live in a small town, don't you? :-)
--
-bmw
--
PDML
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
> If I'm looking for fast glass in that AoV, I might as well get an
> 85/1.4 on APS as a 135 on 24x36.
The Rokinon 85/1.4 has been getting good press:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1577/cat/all
Comes in K-mount. It's $24
On 7/23/2013 11:55 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
Timex makes, or at least used to, a series of watches branded
"Ironman" or somesuch. They had two large buttons on the front
and would do a very good job of taking lap times, or sector times.
They have been getting progressively harder to find over the y
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:22:03PM -0400, John wrote:
> Never cared for either Rolex or Timex. The former is too expensive &
> the latter is too cheap (in all the various definitions of the
> word). I'll stick with the Swiss Army Watch (actual Victorinox) that
> I've worn for the last 30 years.
Ti
> times that amount I could get a highly recommended system that I
>>> honestly couldn't hear the difference in sound quality.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
macro with working distance.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
Kenneth Waller
but can
or more than the A* 135
because of its unique function - macro with working distance.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 7:24 PM
Subject: Re:
ation I'd have to say its worth as much or more than the A* 135
because of its unique function - macro with working distance.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
much or more than the A* 135
because of its unique function - macro with working distance.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 7:24 PM
Subject
Timex's old mechanical design was an escapement mechanism which wasn't
the most accurate, a good copy would give +/- 5 minutes a day, a bad
copy much worse, however they were rugged as all get out. Timex today
doesn't make any mechanical watches at all, and really current day
electrolytic watc
ww.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
Similar discussion for Rolex vs Timex. Mostly similar reasons
for owning both the Rolex and the A* 135mm f1.8.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Bill
w
Not really, everyone has a price.
-Original Message-
>From: John
>Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
>
>So you didn't care what it's worth, you just wanted to rub it in.
>
>On 7/22/2013 6:33 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
>> Ah, but I can ask because I ha
aw I was shooting Pentax. When I did get it and
>>>>> went to another of his workshop he had to borrow and examine it as he had
>>>>> heard it was equal to or better than the Nikon 200 macro he was using.
>>>>> Quite
>>>>> a recommendation I'd say.
&
ard it was equal to or better than the Nikon 200 macro he was using.
>>>> Quite
>>>> a recommendation I'd say.
>>>>
>>>> In my estimation I'd have to say its worth as much or more than the A* 135
>>>> because of its unique function - macro with working
So you didn't care what it's worth, you just wanted to rub it in.
On 7/22/2013 6:33 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
Ah, but I can ask because I have one, bought around 15 years ago for $800usd.
-Original Message-
From: "P.J. Alling"
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
sounding system but for many
times that amount I could get a highly recommended system that I
honestly couldn't hear the difference in sound quality.
Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: Re:
Never cared for either Rolex or Timex. The former is too expensive & the
latter is too cheap (in all the various definitions of the word). I'll
stick with the Swiss Army Watch (actual Victorinox) that I've worn for
the last 30 years.
And the days when I lusted after the A* 135mm f/1.8 are past
orth as much or more than the A* 135
>>> because of its unique function - macro with working distance.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kenneth Waller
>>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message - From:
mation I'd have to say its worth as much or more than the A* 135
>>> because of its unique function - macro with working distance.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kenneth Waller
>>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>>
>>>
>>
gt; Kenneth Waller
>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 7:24 PM
>>
>> Subject: Re: KEH
as much or more than the A* 135
> because of its unique function - macro with working distance.
>
>
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>
>
> - Original Message ----- From: "Darren Addy"
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Addy"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
Kenneth Waller
but can the 1.8 be that much better than a 2.8?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Kenneth Waller
wrote:
Ah, but I can ask because I have one, bought arou
quot;Bruce Walker"
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
Well, your A* 135mm f1.8 is _really_ old, pre-dates digital, and is
missing that new lens smell. Plus it will certainly be suffering from
random subatomic perturbations -- they all do eventually.
I'll take it off your hands fo
On 23 July 2013 05:25, P.J. Alling wrote:
> On an APS-C camera it's like having a 200mm f1.8 for focusing and a 200mm
> f2.8 as far as DOF is concerned at any particular distance, when compared to
> a Full Frame camera. If it lives up to it's reputation, for optical
> quality, it will out perform
at 6:33 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
> Ah, but I can ask because I have one, bought around 15 years ago for $800usd.
>
> -Original Message-
>>From: "P.J. Alling"
>>Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
>>
>>If you have to ask you can't afford it
Kenneth Waller
> but can the 1.8 be that much better than a 2.8?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
> Ah, but I can ask because I have one, bought around 15 years ago for $800usd.
Then we must look to you to answer your own question. (I'm interested
in the answer).
: )
--
"
Ah, but I can ask because I have one, bought around 15 years ago for $800usd.
-Original Message-
>From: "P.J. Alling"
>Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
>
>If you have to ask you can't afford it.
>
>On the other hand you might want to ask Mark Cassio
an unlimited pot of
money, I'd
buy it.
On 7/22/2013 2:38 PM, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
Can it really be worth $2569 ?
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message ----- From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
If
hly recommended system that I honestly couldn't hear the
> difference in sound quality.
>
>
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>
> - Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
> Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
>
times that amount
I could get a highly recommended system that I honestly couldn't hear the
difference in sound quality.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
Sim
aller
- Original Message -
From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
Agree with P.J.
An argument could probably be made for the fact that it isn't going to
sell for LESS in the future, so from that standpoint could be looked
at as an investment. If and when Pen
>>>
>>> Kenneth Waller
>>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>>
>>> - Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
>>> Subject: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
>>>
>>>
>>>> If anyone is interested.
>
r
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message ----- From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
If anyone is interested.
http://www.keh.com/camera/Pentax-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-PK06009016184N?r=FE
--
"Photography is a Basta
>>>> Can it really be worth $2569 ?
>>>>
>>>> Kenneth Waller
>>>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>>>
>>>> - Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
>>>> Subject: KEH
/2013 2:38 PM, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Can it really be worth $2569 ?
>>>
>>> Kenneth Waller
>>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>>
>>> - Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
>>>
t; buy it.
>
>
> On 7/22/2013 2:38 PM, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
>>
>> Can it really be worth $2569 ?
>>
>> Kenneth Waller
>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
>
hotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
If anyone is interested.
http://www.keh.com/camera/Pentax-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-PK06009016184N?r=FE
--
"Photography is a Bastard left by
Similar discussion for Rolex vs Timex. Mostly similar reasons for
owning both the Rolex and the A* 135mm f1.8.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Bill wrote:
> On 22/07/2013 12:38 PM, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
>>
>> Can it really be worth $2569 ?
>>
> Save yourself $2400.00 and go for the f/2.8.
On 22/07/2013 12:38 PM, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
Can it really be worth $2569 ?
Save yourself $2400.00 and go for the f/2.8.
bill
--
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 abov
Can it really be worth $2569 ?
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Darren Addy"
Subject: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
If anyone is interested.
http://www.keh.com/camera/Pentax-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Le
If anyone is interested.
http://www.keh.com/camera/Pentax-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-PK06009016184N?r=FE
--
"Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art" -
Peter Galassi
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdm
53 matches
Mail list logo
