Is it possible that this is a sample variation? Have
other owners noticed this? One poster on Stans lens
comment site said it was identical to his K20/4 in
respect to color rendition with the skylight filter
selected (or maybe the K20/4 is warm too?). At any
rate, I dont think the warm cast
Paul wrote: .
The Pentax 18 did very well. And by the way, Pal
Jensen (spelling? sorry) and others have confirmed the
18/3.5K's warm color cast.
Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Because the lens has 4 built-in filters: 1A skylight,
cloudy (81A?) warming filter, yellow and
At 21:06 28.4.2002 -0400, Andre wrote:
Where did you learn that? [K18/3.5 actually being
19mm] Mine seems awfully wide
It was right here on PDML last week (sorry, I havenít
gotten to know the posters on a first name basis so I
canít give credit here).
I git it from Modern Photography
-
From: andre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 2:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: f:22, K18/3.5 warmth, 20mm bee's nest...
At 21:06 28.4.2002 -0400, Andre wrote:
Where did you learn that? [K18/3.5 actually being
19mm] Mine seems awfully wide
It was right
Paris, Leonard wrote:
This is just an observation. If a lens I own says 18mm on it and it's
really 18.75mm, it's no big deal to me, and I'm not going to start building
a database of the exact tested focal lengths.
I am not sure anyone tests many of them these days, anyway. Relying on
my
I'd agree that the error is no big deal, if tolerance really meant plus or
minus. It doesn't. When was the last time you read a test report that
found that a lens gave you more of what you thought you paid for? A 20 mm
that measured at 19.4 mm? A 200 mm that gave you 205 mm? An f/2 that was
I'd agree that the error is no big deal, if tolerance really meant plus or
minus. It doesn't. When was the last time you read a test report that
found that a lens gave you more of what you thought you paid for? A 20 mm
that measured at 19.4 mm? A 200 mm that gave you 205 mm? An f/2 that
Can't say for A,
Why would you want to use 1/22 in the first place? I
am just curious.
I know that f22 sounds like an overkill, (especially
with wide angle lenses), but I frequently use every
inch of the DOF available to me. I am a botanist, and
I like to make environmental portraits of very
Jonathan Donald wrote:
The 18/3.5 isn't really that poor
Anyway, I
recommend the 18/3.5. A drawback for some will be the
very warm color rendition.
Is it possible that this is a sample variation? Have
other owners noticed this? One poster on Stans lens
comment site said it was identical
At 21:06 28.4.2002 -0400, Andre wrote:
Where did you learn that? [K18/3.5 actually being
19mm] Mine seems awfully wide
It was right here on PDML last week (sorry, I havenít
gotten to know the posters on a first name basis so I
canít give credit here).
I git it from Modern Photography
10 matches
Mail list logo
