g to be using it a lot more than I first anticipated. I'd
> read that the earlier K-series 28/3.5 was the best but this one is
> certainly no slouch."
>
>
> --
>
> Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 14:29:28 -0600 (CST)
> From: Chris Brogden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Pentax-M 28mm
Shel wrote:
For example, the K135/2.5 just feels so
much more comfortable than the M135/3.5, while the M150/3.5 feels
almost perfect.
Yes, the K135/2.5 is a joy. It has become one of my most frequently used lenses. I
used it to snag portraits in a crowd a couple of weeks ago with considerable
Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> I just bought my first "K" lens,
> a 50/1.4, and I must say that I
> love the "feel" and heft of it.
> It just seems very right on my
> K2.
I've never used, or even held, a K50/1.4, but I will soon. I
anticipate a pleasure surge .
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I sure have a knack for getting on your wrong side! :)
?
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
There are no rules for good photographs,
there are only good photographs.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
I just bought my first "K" lens, a 50/1.4, and I must say that I
love the "feel" and heft of it. It just seems very right on my
K2.
Paul wrote:
>I tend to agree with your preference for the K versions. My most
>frequently used lenses seem to be Ks, and I only wish I owned more
>examples of this
ng on your wrong side! :)
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 16:13:56 -0800
From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pentax-M 28mm f3.5 question
I never said that. I don't even have an M28/3.5, but I do have the
K28/3.5, which I like quite a bit.
Paul Franklin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
W
PAUL STENQUIST wrote:
>
> I tend to agree with your preference
> for the K versions. My most
> frequently used lenses seem to be Ks,
> and I only wish I owned more
> examples of this series. However,
> I do like a couple of the M lenses,
> most notably the 50/1.7 and the 35/2.0.
I like the M5
I have one of those, it's a very good lens. I like it's size and the way
it handles. As a matter of fact, my PUG entry for this month was taken
with this lens:
http://pug.komkon.org/01mar/noparkin.html
Since there is some interest in this lens, I scanned in a couple of places
with more detail.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Here are the comments I've collected on the 28/3.5. Because it is so "slow"
>compared to most 28s, it is in little demand and can be readily found for
>less than $100. So don't feel compelled to buy the EBay article; with a
>little Web searching, you can find this lens a
hahha, you gotta love being 100% misquoted :)
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax-M 28mm f3.5 question
> I never said that. I don't even have
Paul Jones wrote:
>
> hahha, you gotta love being 100% misquoted :)
Well, it did give me a chuckle, especially because I don't, in
general, find the M series lenses as enjoyable to use or as
satisfactory optically as the earlier K-mounts.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This messa
I never said that. I don't even have an M28/3.5, but I do have the
K28/3.5, which I like quite a bit.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Shel Belinkoff: "I used the SMC-M 28mm f/3.5 lens to take my single most
> beautiful photograph. I had this enlarged to 12x18 and have it hanging over
> the mantle, wh
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Here are the comments I've collected on the 28/3.5. Because it is so "slow"
> compared to most 28s, it is in little demand and can be readily found for
> less than $100. So don't feel compelled to buy the EBay article; with a
> little Web searching, y
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
> Garjan van Oosten: "If you really need an almost distortion-free wide
> angle lens, go for the 3.5/28 K or M. Distortion is under 0.5% for both."
Thanks! The information is much appreciated. For the record, Gerjan's
name has an "e," not an
There's one of these up on eBay right now at
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1220461760
Has anyone used this lens before? How different is it from the
M28/2.8? My spec sheet says that the 3.5 version is a 6/6 design (the
28/2.8 is a 7/7) and yet is a heavier lens than t
15 matches
Mail list logo
