...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Francis
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 3:19 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)?
What is this "parting with lenses" of which you speak?
Currently I don't see any way I'd let
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 16 February 2013 01:52, Aahz Maruch wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013, Rob Studdert wrote:
>>>
>>> When it's a 10-20mm zoom perhaps?
>>
>> Again, when would you use that instead of e.g. a 14mm? I'm looking for
>> specific use-cases, particularly from p
On 16 February 2013 01:52, Aahz Maruch wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013, Rob Studdert wrote:
>> When it's a 10-20mm zoom perhaps?
>
> Again, when would you use that instead of e.g. a 14mm? I'm looking for
> specific use-cases, particularly from people who use both zooms and
> primes.
Well in my ca
I didn't see the 50-135 as that much smaller either. Until I had both in hand.
And as Bill said, it is also faster.
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 15, 2013, at 12:51 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Bill wrote:
>> On 14/02/2013 10:05 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Sta
Tradeoffs. The 60-250 is bigger and heavier. Good to carry when knowing the
extra length will be needed, but otherwise the 50-135 is a delight.
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 14, 2013, at 11:05 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Stan Halpin wrote:
>>
>> Ones that I wouldn't let go? The
Those storm shots are delicious, Darren. I'd like to have the
equivalent of a 21mm in 35mm film camera terms. but wow, are those
expensive.
ann
On 2/15/2013 10:17, Darren Addy wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
Again, when would you use that instead of e.g. a 14mm?
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
> Again, when would you use that instead of e.g. a 14mm? I'm looking for
> specific use-cases, particularly from people who use both zooms and
> primes.
This is as silly a question as it would be to ask why you would use
14mm when your kit lens
On 15/02/2013 8:52 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 15 February 2013 16:51, Aahz Maruch wrote:
When would those advantages be enough to not bother using the 60-250?
Putting it another way, when is it worth using a zoom with less than 3x
range?
When it's a 10
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 15 February 2013 16:51, Aahz Maruch wrote:
>>
>> When would those advantages be enough to not bother using the 60-250?
>> Putting it another way, when is it worth using a zoom with less than 3x
>> range?
>
> When it's a 10-20mm zoom perhaps?
Again,
On 15/02/2013 2:09 AM, Jostein Øksne wrote:
- Original Message - From:
There is a big difference between not having both and not carrying
both on a vacation when you are minimizing your kit.
Exactly! :-)
And to expand a little, if you have none of them and consider which
one to buy
On 14/02/2013 11:51 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Bill wrote:
On 14/02/2013 10:05 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Stan Halpin wrote:
Ones that I wouldn't let go? The 77 Limited. The FA*200/4 Macro. The
holy trinity of DA* zoom lenses: 16-50, 50-135, and 60-250.
Wha
- Original Message -
From:
There is a big difference between not having both and not carrying both on
a vacation when you are minimizing your kit.
Exactly! :-)
And to expand a little, if you have none of them and consider which one to
buy, I'd go with the 60-250 first.
Jostein
On 15 February 2013 16:51, Aahz Maruch wrote:
> When would those advantages be enough to not bother using the 60-250?
> Putting it another way, when is it worth using a zoom with less than 3x
> range?
When it's a 10-20mm zoom perhaps?
--
Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
Tel: +61-418-166-87
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Bill wrote:
> On 14/02/2013 10:05 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
>>On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Stan Halpin wrote:
>>>
>>>Ones that I wouldn't let go? The 77 Limited. The FA*200/4 Macro. The
>>>holy trinity of DA* zoom lenses: 16-50, 50-135, and 60-250.
>>
>>What do you see as the advantage
There is a big difference between not having both and not carrying both on a
vacation when you are minimizing your kit.
Aahz Maruch wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Stan Halpin wrote:
>>
>> Ones that I wouldn't let go? The 77 Limited. The FA*200/4 Macro. The
>> holy trinity of DA* zoom lenses: 16-
On 14/02/2013 10:05 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Stan Halpin wrote:
Ones that I wouldn't let go? The 77 Limited. The FA*200/4 Macro. The
holy trinity of DA* zoom lenses: 16-50, 50-135, and 60-250.
What do you see as the advantage of having both 50-135 and 60-250?
(Other people h
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013, Stan Halpin wrote:
>
> Ones that I wouldn't let go? The 77 Limited. The FA*200/4 Macro. The
> holy trinity of DA* zoom lenses: 16-50, 50-135, and 60-250.
What do you see as the advantage of having both 50-135 and 60-250?
(Other people have said not to bother.)
--
Hugs and ba
-Pentax
> DA16-45, a great lens for travel.
>
> John Coyle
> Brisbane, Australia
>
>
>
>
>
> 12. feb. 2013 kl. 19:03 skrev Darren Addy :
>
>> I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
>> assembled, the following ques
rrent
photography, an SMC-Pentax
DA16-45, a great lens for travel.
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
12. feb. 2013 kl. 19:03 skrev Darren Addy :
> I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
> assembled, the following question:
> What lenses do you regret parting with (or wil
d :-)
ann
- Original Message -
From: Darren Addy
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 1:03 PM
Subject: What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)?
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following ques
o.
Cheers,
Dave
On Feb 13, 2013, at 7:03 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
> I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
> assembled, the following question:
> What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
> have the feeling some interesting stories, i
On Feb 13, 2013, at 8:11 AM, Bob W wrote:
> Can't remember, and I'm too lazy to go and look at it.
You're not being lazy, you're being efficient by delegating the task of finding
out to whoever wants to know.
:)
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/ma
y
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 1:03 PM
Subject: What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)?
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or
On 2/12/13 1:03 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
who-knows-what-else might come
On 2013-02-12 15:57, DagT wrote:
That would be the A*85 f/1.4. The worn exterior reminds me that it was my
favorite lens for almost 15 years, and the glass is still nice because of the
UV filter I used and changes when it was to full of dirt and scratches.
For me it would be the FA* 200/2.8 .
I do a lot of buying/selling and try to end up improving my "overall
team" by doing so. But the one lens I regretted selling in that effort
was the original Vivitar Series 1 Bokina (90mm f2.5 with 1:1 matched
multiplier). Fortunately, I recently found the Bokina II, the improved
Tokina AT-X 90mm f2
On 13/2/13, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I calibrated my new pano rig to use it on the other night :)
Interesting - details?
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
|| (O) |Web Video Producion
--
_
--
PDML Pentax-Di
On 13 February 2013 18:42, Steve Cottrell wrote:
> On 12/2/13, DagT, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>That would be the A*85 f/1.4. The worn exterior reminds me that it was
>>my favorite lens for almost 15 years, and the glass is still nice
>>because of the UV filter I used and changes when it was
On 12/2/13, DagT, discombobulated, unleashed:
>That would be the A*85 f/1.4. The worn exterior reminds me that it was
>my favorite lens for almost 15 years, and the glass is still nice
>because of the UV filter I used and changes when it was to full of dirt
>and scratches.
Yup. Still have mine, s
PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)?
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML assembled, the
following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I have the
feeling
On 13 February 2013 05:03, Darren Addy wrote:
> What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
> have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
I regret selling my A*135/1.8 and A*200/4 macro not because I was
enamored with them but that their sales woul
Have to agree. The 60-250, my most used lens, is a keeper. The 16-50 would be
hard to part with as well.
Paul via phone
On Feb 12, 2013, at 9:19 PM, John Francis wrote:
>
> What is this "parting with lenses" of which you speak?
>
> Currently I don't see any way I'd let the 60-250 get away fr
What is this "parting with lenses" of which you speak?
Currently I don't see any way I'd let the 60-250 get away from me,
and even though I haven't used it in a couple of years I hope that
I don't need to reclaim the equity tied up in the 250-600.
But while five years ago I wouldn't have conside
On 12/02/2013 12:03 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
who-knows-what-else might
e:
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
who-knows-what-else might come from this thread. Depending upon
every
scussion to ask the PDML
>> assembled, the following question:
>> What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
>> have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
>> who-knows-what-else might come from this thread. Depending upon
>>
On 2/12/2013 1:03 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
who-knows-what-else might come
e.net
-
-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Darren Addy
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 1:03 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)?
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to as
on 2013-02-12 11:03 Darren Addy wrote
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)?
i have a small regret for selling my Super Takumar 85/1.9; it seemed rather
special, but
/05may/pugkamer.html
Dag Thrane
http://www.thrane.name
12. feb. 2013 kl. 19:03 skrev Darren Addy :
> I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
> assembled, the following question:
> What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
> have
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
who-knows-what-else might come from this thread. Depending upon
everyone's participation (of course) it has the potential to be a
whopper of a thread.
I'd like
>
>
> pdml-requ...@pdml.net wrote:
>>
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:52:04 -0600
>> From: Bob Sullivan
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: What lenses do you regret parting with (or will*never*
>> partwith)?
>> Messa
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:52:04 -0600
From: Bob Sullivan
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: What lenses do you regret parting with (or will*never*
part with)?
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Darren,
They can sell the A*135/1.8 when I'm d
even had it
checked by Eric Hendrickson, and he didn't find anything wrong with it.
Igor
Tue Feb 12 13:03:25 EST 2013
Darren Addy wrote:
> I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
> assembled, the following question:
> What lenses do you regret parti
> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Darren Addy
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Bob W wrote:
> > and the A 24-35/3.5 (I still have one of those for my MX).
>
> That's an M lens, isn't it?
>
Can't remember, and I'm too lazy to go and look at it.
B
--
PDML Pentax-Di
> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bob Sullivan
>
[...]
> He had some moose pictures, and suggested 'keeping your distance.'
> Here's an early shot from 2010 with my K-7 and DA60-250/4.
> The young male was so close I had to pull the zoom back to 200mm.
> And you can't believ
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Bob W wrote:
> and the A 24-35/3.5 (I still have one of those for my MX).
That's an M lens, isn't it?
--
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
> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Darren Addy
>
> I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
> assembled, the following question:
> What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? [...]
>
> I'd like
h killer lens.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=16535116
Regards, Bob S.
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
> assembled, the following question:
> What lenses do you regret parting with (or w
I thought it might be an interesting discussion to ask the PDML
assembled, the following question:
What lenses do you regret parting with (or will *never* part with)? I
have the feeling some interesting stories, images, and
who-knows-what-else might come from this thread. Depending upon
everyone&#
50 matches
Mail list logo
