I second this. The 550mm lens would be perfect for skittish birds,
especially when there is little tree cover for getting closer. If it
will be f5.6, as some people have guessed, it might even be affordable
(or at least affordable enough that my wife won't beat me over the head
with it when I
;-)
From: Paul Stenquistpnstenqu...@comcast.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail Listpdml@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, February 3, 2012 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: Lens road map
On Feb 3, 2012, at 12:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
Been thinking more about this, and the long long telephoto doesn't
make
On 3/2/12, Darren Addy, discombobulated, unleashed:
I think the evidence is getting stronger for a FF
Pentax camera to be at least announced, very soon.
Sorry mate, the hat's out of the smoker now (since the K-Uh-Oh) and I'm
not putting it back in just like that. Gotta give me something better
all they need to get the ball rolling is a FF body and a good
28-85 kit digital lens to go with it.
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Cotty
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 5:52 PM
To: pentax list
Subject: Re: Lens road map
On 3/2
Been thinking more about this, and the long long telephoto doesn't
make a huge amount of sense to me on an APS-C camera. A 550mm lens?
That would be a 775mm (35mm equiv) on a crop camera. Anybody see a
huge demand for that? Now a 550mm or 600mm lens on a full frame, would
be much more likely to be
On Feb 3, 2012, at 12:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
Been thinking more about this, and the long long telephoto doesn't
make a huge amount of sense to me on an APS-C camera. A 550mm lens?
That would be a 775mm (35mm equiv) on a crop camera. Anybody see a
huge demand for that?
I want one for my
I'd secretly (my wife is listening) like to see a 400mm f/4 or 4.5 and a
quality 1.4 T/C.
Jack ;-)
From: Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, February 3, 2012 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: Lens road map
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Igor Roshchin s...@komkon.org wrote:
Thu Feb 2 11:45:31 EST 2012
Miserere wrote:
On 2 February 2012 10:35, Tim .sleby maritimtim at gmail.com wrote:
Don't know about the authentasy of this, (I'm at work and can't check
it out)
On 2012-02-03 12:16, Darren Addy wrote:
A 550mm lens?
That would be a 775mm (35mm equiv) on a crop camera. Anybody see a
huge demand for that?
Well, they derived enough perceived benefit from the FA* 600/4 and the
FA* 400/2.8 to keep them in the catalog for years, even though it'd
often
Don't know about the authentasy of this, (I'm at work and can't check it out)
http://www.photographyblog.com/news/pentax_k-mount_lens_roadmap/
--
MaritimTim
My private photo blog: http://maritimtim.blogspot.com/
My photo class blog: http://z-fotokurs.blogspot.com/
On 2 February 2012 10:35, Tim Øsleby maritim...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't know about the authentasy of this, (I'm at work and can't check it out)
http://www.photographyblog.com/news/pentax_k-mount_lens_roadmap/
--
MaritimTim
Photographyblog is saying they saw the new Pentax lens roadmap at
DA standard 50mm? I guess someone is confusing with equivalents. Maybe a
DA*31mm 1.8? :-)
DA zoom Limited sounds like a contradiction in terms.
DagT
Den 2. feb. 2012 kl. 17:45 skrev Miserere:
On 2 February 2012 10:35, Tim Øsleby maritim...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't know about the authentasy of
On 02/02/2012 10:45 AM, Miserere wrote:
Focal lengths are approximate and garnered from reading the tea leaves
in the images of the roadmap shown by Photographyblog. I'm sure Pentax
is being vague on purpose, most likely because many of them are
probably not even on the drawing board. The
Thu Feb 2 11:45:31 EST 2012
Miserere wrote:
On 2 February 2012 10:35, Tim .sleby maritimtim at gmail.com wrote:
Don't know about the authentasy of this, (I'm at work and can't check
it out)
http://www.photographyblog.com/news/pentax_k-mount_lens_roadmap/
--
MaritimTim
Looks like it's genuine.
http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/pdf/lens_roadmap.pdf
--
MaritimTim
My private photo blog: http://maritimtim.blogspot.com/
My photo class blog: http://z-fotokurs.blogspot.com/
To err is human
Nope - the shots of the roadmap show the 50mm lens positioned
right at the join of the 18-50 and 50-135, at a real 50mm.
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 06:04:57PM +0100, DagT wrote:
DA standard 50mm? I guess someone is confusing with equivalents. Maybe a
DA*31mm 1.8? :-)
DA zoom Limited sounds like
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 12:17:15PM -0500, Igor Roshchin wrote:
Thu Feb 2 11:45:31 EST 2012
Miserere wrote:
2013:
- DA AF RC 1.4x teleconverter
What does RC stand for besides Radio Control?
I'd bet on something like range converter. With in-body SR,
and zoom lenses, a
Igor Roshchin wrote:
What does RC stand for besides Radio Control?
Rear Converter
Dario
--
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.
Just dreaming…
Den 2. feb. 2012 kl. 19:25 skrev John Francis:
Nope - the shots of the roadmap show the 50mm lens positioned
right at the join of the 18-50 and 50-135, at a real 50mm.
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 06:04:57PM +0100, DagT wrote:
DA standard 50mm? I guess someone is confusing with
Good news then in regard to long glass. No DFAs to be seen, but I'm not sure
that's a designation that Pentax would use, even if a full frame camera were on
the way. But longer glass and a 50mm lens tend to make one think full frame.
Paul
On Feb 2, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote:
Looks
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 12:05 PM, William Robb
anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/02/2012 10:45 AM, Miserere wrote:
Focal lengths are approximate and garnered from reading the tea leaves
in the images of the roadmap shown by Photographyblog. I'm sure Pentax
is being vague on purpose,
Those were my thoughts. If the standard is 50mm, then that's FF or Pentax have
redefined the term standard.
Peter
On 2 Feb 2012, at 18:50, Paul Stenquist wrote:.
Good news then in regard to long glass. No DFAs to be seen, but I'm not sure
that's a designation that Pentax would use, even
On Feb 2, 2012, at 11:13 AM, Peter Jordan wrote:
Those were my thoughts. If the standard is 50mm, then that's FF or Pentax
have redefined the term standard.
Not really, a lot of people just didn't redefine standard with APS, and just
use 50 as normal 30 and shorter as wide, and 75 and
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: William Robb anotherdrunken...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Lens road map
On 02/02/2012 10:45 AM, Miserere wrote:
Focal lengths are approximate and garnered from reading the tea leaves
I agree with those who are reading the tea leaves of the lens road map
and seeing full frame (even though they are using the DA placeholder
(how could they really do anything else without tipping their hand?).
Calling the 50 a standard lens is the most obvious tip off. I think
it would be easiest
On Feb 2, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I agree with those who are reading the tea leaves of the lens road map
and seeing full frame (even though they are using the DA placeholder
(how could they really do anything else without tipping their hand?).
I would expect that the DA prefix
From: William Robb
On 02/02/2012 10:45 AM, Miserere wrote:
Focal lengths are approximate and garnered from reading the tea leaves
in the images of the roadmap shown by Photographyblog. I'm sure Pentax
is being vague on purpose, most likely because many of them are
probably not even on the
Yes I agree with Paul and would add that for those not familiar with a roadmap:
a roadmap is made to give customers idea about the future
developements. It is already unusual for a roadmap to show all lenses
currently available. Also a roadmap is nowhere a commitment to
informations contained in
Nor are the wonderful 31, 43, and 77mm limiteds. Will new Pentax
owners be unable to enjoy these marvels?
Bertil
None of the FA series lenses are listed on it.
The road map only seems to be for DA, DA* DFA lenses.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Mark Roberts escribió:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
Thanks for the link, Mark. But I am afraid I have grown highly skeptical
of Pentax lens roadmaps. If this time they manage to fulfill their
promises, the DA 17-70 and DA 60-250 will surface almost two years after
John Celio wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
Oh sweet! 15mm is a bit wide for me, but I'd like to see how it does
compared to the older 14mm. Personally, I still want the 10-17 Fisheye
for
my ultra-wide needs.
The 10-17 fisheye is a lot of fun, but the image
Yes, the 10-17 only a good choice if you want fisheye distortion. If
you plan on correcting most of your shots to rectilinear, you're much
better off with the DA 12-24.
Paul
On Jan 30, 2008, at 6:59 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
John Celio wrote:
And SDM TC's are coming, Pentax's first new
TC's since the SMC-F era brought us the F 1.7x.
The TC(s) may be rebadged versions of the Kenko 300 TCs--which are
reported to be excellent. Pentax has said that for them to design TCs
from scratch in the foreseeable future (2-3 years) they would have
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:04:45AM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
And SDM TC's are coming, Pentax's first new
TC's since the SMC-F era brought us the F 1.7x.
The TC(s) may be rebadged versions of the Kenko 300 TCs--which are
reported to be excellent. Pentax has said that for them to design
John Francis wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:04:45AM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
The TC(s) may be rebadged versions of the Kenko 300 TCs--which are
reported to be excellent. Pentax has said that for them to design TCs
from scratch in the foreseeable future (2-3 years) they would have to
It doesn't look quite that way to me.. Pentax seems to be planning on
three lens lines. Fast Professional * lenses all with SDM.
Relatively small compact very high build quality, but slightly slower
Limited lenses, (lots of pancakes no room for SDM probably), and more
Consumer oriented DA
The roadmap lists recently released and new lenses. That doesn't mean
older lenses will no longer be available. But I wouldn't be surprised
if the lenses for full frame are eventually taken out of production.
However, like most Pentax lenses of the past, there are plenty of
them out there,
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
--
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.
A new rear converter as well. DA*60-250 in now scheduled for summer. And an SDM
55/1.4. Sounds good.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
Oh sweet! 15mm is a bit wide for me, but I'd like to see how it does
compared to the older 14mm. Personally, I still want the 10-17 Fisheye for
my ultra-wide needs.
I hope that new DA*30mm is a 1.4, it would be a great slightly-wide normal
I'm actually looking forward to California's weltering central valley
summer..the DA* 60~250 may actually materialize. YES!!
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A new rear converter as well. DA*60-250 in now scheduled for summer.
And an SDM 55/1.4. Sounds good.
Paul
-- Original
On 1/29/08, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
--
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
In line with the small size of the limited lenses I expect it to be an
f3.2 pancake.
Adam Maas wrote:
On 1/29/08, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
The 35/2.8 Ltd (macro) is still there on the list. The 30mm will be
more compact, I would guess also a 2.8.
stan
On Jan 29, 2008, at 9:15 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
On 1/29/08, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
P.J. wrote:
In line with the small size of the limited lenses I expect it to be an
f3.2 pancake.
stan wrote:
The 35/2.8 Ltd (macro) is still there on the list. The 30mm will be
more compact, I would guess also a 2.8.
Keep in mind, guys, the 30 is a DA*, not a Limited, and thus does not
Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
I notice that the 50/1.4 does not seem to be on it.
Has that been discontinued?
--
Sandy Harris,
Nanjing, China
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's a rear convertor? A teleconverter? Or something else?
Yep, it's a teleconverter.
A ref converter is for the eyepiece.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from
A new rear converter as well. DA*60-250 in now scheduled for summer. And
an
SDM 55/1.4. Sounds good.
Paul
=
Boy, I feel dumb tonight.
What's a rear convertor? A teleconverter? Or something else?
Padded undies.
;)
John
(your first guess was right)
--
In a message dated 1/29/2008 6:35:24 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A new rear converter as well. DA*60-250 in now scheduled for summer. And an
SDM 55/1.4. Sounds good.
Paul
=
Boy, I feel dumb tonight.
What's a rear convertor? A teleconverter? Or
At 02:09 PM 30/01/2008, Sandy Harris wrote:
Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
I notice that the 50/1.4 does not seem to be on it.
Has that been discontinued?
None of the FA series lenses are listed on it.
The road map only seems to be
I'm not Bob, but yes it's a teleconverter.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/29/2008 6:35:24 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A new rear converter as well. DA*60-250 in now scheduled for summer. And an
SDM 55/1.4. Sounds good.
Paul
=
Boy,
- Original Message -
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My guess is only the D-FA for the 645D will have aperture ring,
while all others (being DA) won't.
The operation of the aperture lever in the 645 system is the other way
round from the K-mount lever. Maybe this design is
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:27:11PM -0500, Mishka wrote:
i think they are leveraging that with small limited lenses
quite nicely. if there was a choice, usm or small primes,
i would pick the second. perhaps that's not what pros
need -- than i'm happy pentax is not pro oriented.
best,
mishka
LOL I don't think we're too far apart on many things ...
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
How is it that we agree so much on some things, Shel? ;-)
Godfrey
On Feb 23, 2006, at 8:50 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Some people care about specs, others care about making
Why shouldn't the pancakes be considered as pro lenses?
I'm wondering is they are aiming at the old rangefinder market. A lot of pros
liked Leica M6 because of their compact size and good lenses...
DagT
fra: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
i think they are leveraging that with small limited
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote:
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
Not really, it's a DA.
But they plan a DFA55/2.8. I will buy it in a flash. Not.
Kostas
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
I guess it does. Their conservatism however does little now for the
photography that I like to pursue. ...
And what kind of photography is that, really? Have you defined it?
Yes, but you deleted
, it wouldn't be a small one.
Tom C.
From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:31:47 -0500
Tom C wrote:
I don't see how you can call it under-spec'd compared to Canon
(especially
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/02/24 Fri AM 09:57:53 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote:
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive
What's wrong with the 55/2.8? It is for the 645D,
after all - according to the english version of that
roadmap.
--- Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
But they plan a DFA55/2.8. I will buy it in a flash.
Not.
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Jon Myers wrote:
What's wrong with the 55/2.8? It is for the 645D,
after all - according to the english version of that
roadmap.
Thanks, I read that later on. What is wrong is that it would benefit
from not being on the same roadmap as the K-mount products.
Kostas
- Original Message -
From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That make sense. It will be the new standard lens. The D FA label
probably
(almost certainly) indicate that it will be full frame and that it will
fit
film 645 as well. That strongly indicate that it have aperture ring
I don't see a definition for a kind of photography in that quote,
Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment. What kind
of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's photography.
Godfrey
On Feb 24, 2006, at 2:09 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
And what kind of
photography. In it Rob expands that
for that type of photographs he needs a combination of low noise in
high ISO and bright lenses. He concludes that Pentax is not moving
towards this direction. The subject of the thread is Lens Road Map
revised.
And don't shout, I read even without it.
Kostas
On 2006-02-24 06:08, Paul Stenquist wrote:
You can get two of the new Pentax for the price of one 5D. Or you could
make a sizable down payment on the 645D, which apparently will be much
higher spec than the 5D.
So the new roadmap indicates:
- 'consumer cameras' use APS sized sensors and
The lens mount for the new pro camera is not PK, it's the 645 mount. And the
sensor isn't 35mm full frame. It's somewhere in between that and 645. The DFA
lens on the chart is apparently a 645 mount lens.
-- Original message --
From: Martin Trautmann [EMAIL
On 2006-02-24 16:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The lens mount for the new pro camera is not PK, it's the 645 mount.
How do you know?
And the sensor isn't 35mm full frame.
I suppose that it's not really 35 mm. 36x24 mm - ø 43 mm,
60:45 @ 43 mm - 34.6 x 26.0 mm
That's 4 % more area ;-)
I
-- Original message --
From: Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2006-02-24 16:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The lens mount for the new pro camera is not PK, it's the 645 mount.
How do you know?
Pentax made that clear when they announced this camera some
that for that type of photographs he needs a combination of low
noise in high ISO and bright lenses. He concludes that Pentax is
not moving towards this direction. The subject of the thread is
Lens Road Map revised.
You do a lot of interpretation for the words low light work ...
Rob didn't say that he
*ist D ( or successor)
+DA 40 F2.8
+DA 21 F3.2
+DA 70 F2.4
Together they mean that in my next fight with British Airways over carry-on
weight, I'll win (again). These can just about all go in a pocket.
Joe
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:57:53AM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote:
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
Not really, it's a DA.
So's the 12-24, and that's almost into four figures.
The 10-17
John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:57:53AM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote:
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
Not really, it's a DA.
So's the 12-24, and that's almost into four
I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass.
-Adam
I think that's all we're going to see in PK mount. I'm fine with that.
Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass.
-Adam
I think that's all we're going to see in PK mount. I'm fine with that.
Paul
Makes sense, since I don't expect Pentax to introduce any 35mm cameras
in the future, and also don't expect the film offerings
Hi!
Ladies and gents, I am rather puzzled by two Pentax limited lenses - the
most modern ones - the 40 mm and 70 mm. I see no other reason for their
introduction except size and may be price. Pentax already produces
outstanding 43 and 77 mm limited lenses. They work very well on *istD
and on
I agree. They will be about as compact as an old range finder with
lenses having corresponding fields of view.
DagT
Den 24. feb. 2006 kl. 18.31 skrev jtainter:
*ist D ( or successor)
+DA 40 F2.8
+DA 21 F3.2
+DA 70 F2.4
Together they mean that in my next fight with British Airways over
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:44:23PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass.
-Adam
I think that's all we're going to see in PK mount. I'm fine with that.
Paul
I'd say that the announcement of DA f2.8 zooms which replace the
previous
On Feb 24, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Ladies and gents, I am rather puzzled by two Pentax limited lenses
- the most modern ones - the 40 mm and 70 mm. I see no other reason
for their introduction except size and may be price. Pentax already
produces outstanding 43 and 77 mm
Hi!
Why do I feel that they are trying to beat the dead horse by labeling
those lenses limited...
I never did get what Limited was supposed to mean anyway, vs the FA*
labeling. Silly games in naming.
Godfrey, remember in Men In Black (the first one), when Will Smith is
passing that exam?
- Original Message -
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ladies and gents, I am rather puzzled by two Pentax limited lenses - the
most modern ones - the 40 mm and 70 mm. I see no other reason for their
introduction except size and may be price.
But size and price are very
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:57:53AM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote:
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
Not really, it's a DA.
So's the 12-24, and that's
On 2006-02-24, at 20:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I never did get what Limited was supposed to mean anyway, vs the
FA* labeling. Silly games in naming.
For me FA* were high performance lenses with modern build quality
(mixture of plastic and metal) while Limiteds are from old school -
no
On 2006-02-24, at 19:55, Boris Liberman wrote:
Ladies and gents, I am rather puzzled by two Pentax limited lenses
- the most modern ones - the 40 mm and 70 mm. I see no other reason
for their introduction except size and may be price. Pentax already
produces outstanding 43 and 77 mm
On 24 Feb 2006 at 8:01, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I don't see a definition for a kind of photography in that quote,
Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment. What kind
of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's photography.
Just butting in here for a minute,
Hello Rob,
Based on your description, am I to interpret that the issue with
bodies has mostly to do with High ISO/Low Noise? Essentially a larger
sensor becomes the real solution from the body side of things. That
would mean either a full frame sensor or a MF body. So Nikon is no
help to you
On 2006-02-25, at 00:51, Rob Studdert wrote:
Just butting in here for a minute, my photographic endeavours
include quite a
lot of mid-high energy concert photography these days, and as a
consequence
generally I find myself shooting in very low light/poor quality
light environs.
Static low
On 24 Feb 2006 at 20:39, Pål Jensen wrote:
But size and price are very important market niches. I think it is brilliant
except that I am reluctant to buy lenses without aperture rings.
Better get used to it, I'd be surprised to hear that you're expecting aperture
rings on many of the lenses
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 24 Feb 2006 at 20:39, Pål Jensen wrote:
But size and price are very important market niches. I think it is
brilliant
except that I am reluctant to buy lenses without aperture rings.
Better get used to it, I'd be surprised to hear that you're expecting
aperture
rings
On 24 Feb 2006 at 15:02, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Hello Rob,
Based on your description, am I to interpret that the issue with
bodies has mostly to do with High ISO/Low Noise? Essentially a larger
sensor becomes the real solution from the body side of things. That
would mean either a full
On Feb 24, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
Pentax seem now simply hell bent on heading
done the pretty/compact/light niche end of the market, and that's not
where I
want to go.
I don't know about pretty. I guess they're okay. And some of the new
lenses seem to be upgrades in speed --
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf
DA16-50/2.8!
Cheers,
Ken
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 09:20:47PM -0500, K.Takeshita wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf
DA16-50/2.8!
Now we know why there's a rebate on the 16-45/4
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
On 23 Feb 2006 at 21:20, K.Takeshita wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf
DA16-50/2.8!
Is anyone else more than a little confused over the inclusion of a DFA55/2.8
and DA70/2.4LTD?
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is anyone else more than a little confused over the inclusion of a
DFA55/2.8
and DA70/2.4LTD?
I am confused over the D-FA 55/2.8 but not the 70/2.4 Limited.
On 2/23/06 10:37 PM, Rob Studdert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DFA55/2.8
This is for 645D
Ken
On 2/23/06 9:32 PM, John Francis, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 09:20:47PM -0500, K.Takeshita wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf
DA16-50/2.8!
Now we know why there's a rebate on the 16-45/4
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks
- Original Message -
From: K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DFA55/2.8
This is for 645D
That make sense. It will be the new standard lens. The D FA label probably
(almost certainly) indicate that it will be full frame and that it will fit
film 645 as well. That strongly indicate
On 24 Feb 2006 at 3:41, Pål Jensen wrote:
I am confused over the D-FA 55/2.8 but not the 70/2.4 Limited.
Yes I guess it would look good next to my 77/1.8LTD if I was trying to find the
smallest least usable lenses.
All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or
On 23 Feb 2006 at 21:42, K.Takeshita wrote:
On 2/23/06 10:37 PM, Rob Studdert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DFA55/2.8
This is for 645D
Thanks Ken, that makes much more sense now, still doesn't account for the 70mm
though?
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)
Weird...
Tom C.
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:37:24 +1000
On 23 Feb 2006 at 21:20, K.Takeshita wrote:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
