Fri Mar 4 21:10:55 CST 2011
P. J. Alling wrote:
It's a bit late, but I have experience with the Pentax F 70-210mm
f4.0~6.5, ...
That sounds rather intriguing... (if not kinky).
;-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
Fri Mar 4 21:10:55 CST 2011
P. J. Alling wrote:
It's a bit late, but I have experience with the Pentax F 70-210mm
f4.0~6.5, ...
... and I forgot:
Mark!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit
On 3/6/2011 12:31 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
Fri Mar 4 21:10:55 CST 2011
P. J. Alling wrote:
It's a bit late, but I have experience with the Pentax F 70-210mm
f4.0~6.5, ...
That sounds rather intriguing... (if not kinky).
I could only wish, but unfortunatly it's just awkwardly written...
It's a bit late, but I have experience with the Pentax F 70-210mm
f4.0~6.5, it's very well built, like a light tank, really, and very
sharp, and a bit heavier than one of the plastic bodied FA 70-200mm
zooms, though and from everything I've seen quite a bit better
optically. It's also quite a
Hi Paul,
Before the 60-250 came out I was looking at replacing my 50-200 Sigma
lens. I took a memory card into a shop and did some test shots with
the Pentax 50-200 and 55-300 and neither could convince me to change.
I am however very happy with the 60-250. I got mine by having CR
Kennedy
It's 9 oz for the 50-200 vs 15.5 for the 55-300. That is a big
difference, although it's a lot more reach especially for animals.
Just to complicate your day, Ann.
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:10 AM, Ann Sanfedele ann...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
The DA 50-200 is a lot of lens for
Hi folks,
I'm looking for a zoom to complement the 17-70/4 which I recently
acquired to replace the 18-55 kit lens. I'm looking for quality optics without
huge weight or huge price.
If the 60-250/4 was a little cheaper and a little lighter it would be a done
deal, but it isn't.
On Feb 8, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Paul Ewins wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm looking for a zoom to complement the 17-70/4 which I recently
acquired to replace the 18-55 kit lens. I'm looking for quality optics
without huge weight or huge price.
Aren't we all.
If the 60-250/4 was a little
The DA 50-200 is a lot of lens for the money. Very good image quality. Build
quality is just okay, but I shot around ten thousand frames with one and didn't
break it. Sold it in like new condition when I bought the DA* 60-250. Of course
the DA* 50-135 is very good, but it's not inexpensive. I
On Feb 8, 2011, at 9:11 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Feb 8, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Paul Ewins wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm looking for a zoom to complement the 17-70/4 which I recently
acquired to replace the 18-55 kit lens. I'm looking for quality optics
without huge weight or huge price.
-
From: Paul Ewins paulew...@optusnet.com.au
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 7:47 PM
Subject: The right zoom
Hi folks,
I'm looking for a zoom to complement the 17-70/4 which I recently acquired
to replace the 18-55 kit lens. I'm looking for quality
Paul Stenquist wrote:
The DA 50-200 is a lot of lens for the money. Very good image quality. Build
quality is just okay, but I shot around ten thousand frames with one and didn't
break it. Sold it in like new condition when I bought the DA* 60-250. Of course
the DA* 50-135 is very good,
, Australia
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Paul
Ewins
Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 11:47 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: The right zoom
Hi folks,
I'm looking for a zoom to complement the 17-70/4 which I recently
13 matches
Mail list logo
