Hamley & Co. "Cowboy Clothing and Gear: The Complete Hamley
Catalog of 1942." If pressed, I'd throw in spurs, but they'd be used
spurs.
;-)
Cheers, Christine
- Original Message - From: "Thibouille"
To:
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 5:21 AM
Original Message -
From: "Thibouille"
To:
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 5:21 AM
Subject: How much would you pay for an FA 50/2.8 macro?
I do not really need one but one good priced, I think. Even for
resale, it may tempt me.
--
Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
P
I do not really need one but one good priced, I think. Even for
resale, it may tempt me.
--
Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...
Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB
Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
P
My wife has an F 50mm macro. It's the sharpest lens
in the house. I bought it for myself, but gave it to
her because I don't have an AF body. Dumb, dumb, dumb
-Lon
David Madsen wrote:
I got to shoot one of the FA 50mm macro lenses for a day a few years ago. I
took some flower photos at my
I will try with Cf lens. And just for sake of testing
I will try few glass mounted slides.
Thanks you verymuch
Ramesh
--- graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then there is your problem.
>
> You have a FF (flat-field) lens that is intended for
> glass mounted slides. A CF
> (curved-field) lens
Then there is your problem.
You have a FF (flat-field) lens that is intended for glass mounted slides. A CF
(curved-field) lens is for regular slide mounts where the film tends to curl a
bit. Easiest way to check this out is to buy a small box of glass slide mounts
and remount some of your slid
difference between them is
> >>immense. Back in the old days
> >>the Leitz and Schneider lenses were the best, with
> >>several brands considered
> >>somewhat below them. None of the Kodak lenses were
> >>considered great, OK at best.
> >>
> >&g
ll of the above says there could be any number of
reasons his projected slides
were not super sharp, even if the macro was.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Fred"
Subject: Re: FA 50/2.8 Macro
Sometimes the lens defects in the slide
projector's lens can mak
- Original Message -
From: "Ramesh Kumar"
Subject: Re: FA 50/2.8 Macro
> My slides are plastic mounted. In my case, expensive
> projectors and lenses does not seem to solve all the
> problems!!
>
> I have Apollo lens and Kodak Select lens. With Appollo
>
est.
>
> All of the above says there could be any number of
> reasons his projected slides
> were not super sharp, even if the macro was.
>
>
> William Robb wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Fred"
> > Subject: Re: FA 50/2.8 Macr
Sometimes that is due to the curvature of the slide itself. I have run
into this with some slides that were quite curved.
Fred wrote:
Sometimes the lens defects in the slide projector's lens can make
a good slide (taken with a good camera lens) look bad. So, do
you know for sure that the slid
-
From: "Fred"
Subject: Re: FA 50/2.8 Macro
Sometimes the lens defects in the slide projector's lens can make
a good slide (taken with a good camera lens) look bad. So, do
you know for sure that the slide image itself is soft at the
edges? (Have you checked the slide with a loup
- Original Message -
From: "Fred"
Subject: Re: FA 50/2.8 Macro
> >> Sometimes the lens defects in the slide projector's lens can make
> >> a good slide (taken with a good camera lens) look bad. So, do
> >> you know for sure that the slide ima
> If I focused sharply on the center of the image, the edges and
> corners were out of focus. If I focused on the corners, then the
> center was out of focus.
And, Ramesh, I forgot to suggest trying to see if this is a factor
with your slide projection disappointments. Try "rocking" the focus
ba
>> Sometimes the lens defects in the slide projector's lens can make
>> a good slide (taken with a good camera lens) look bad. So, do
>> you know for sure that the slide image itself is soft at the
>> edges? (Have you checked the slide with a loupe?)
> You may be right, this could be due to proje
> > Recently I started observing the sharpness in
> edges during
> > projection. I found that sharpness reduction in
> the edges is
> > apparently, on some cases it is too obvious.
>
> Sometimes the lens defects in the slide projector's
> lens can make a
> good slide (taken with a good camera lens
> Since I lost an A 50/2.8 auction on ebay last night, I thought
> maybe the FA 50/2.8 would be a good choice, since I have one
> available locally.
The A 50/2.8 Macro is a very different lens than the apparently
optically identical F and FA 50/2.8 Macros. The A is a lovely lens
to use (if you li
> Recently I started observing the sharpness in edges during
> projection. I found that sharpness reduction in the edges is
> apparently, on some cases it is too obvious.
Sometimes the lens defects in the slide projector's lens can make a
good slide (taken with a good camera lens) look bad. So, d
I have this macro lens. I use this for landscape
photography too. Recently I started observing the
sharpness in edges during projection. I found that
sharpness reduction in the edges is apparently, on
some cases it is too obvious. I was not comparing the
test charts and they were mostly landscape s
Considering the fact that I paid $300.00 US for mine I think $188 is a good
deal for a great lens.
Robert
- Original Message -
From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pdml" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 7:38 PM
Subje
> The lens has a dampening switch on it so when you use it in manual focus
it
> feels like a manual focus lens.
That's one of the most important things for me - it's good to know that I'll
have an opportunity to handle this lens before buing, though :-) I knew
about the dampening swich, but I've r
.
Just my two cents worth.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Łukasz Kacperczyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 5:38 PM
To: pdml
Subject: FA 50/2.8 Macro
Hi there,
I have an opportunity to buy this lens in ex + condition for the equivalent
of $188. Is this a good p
Hi there,
I have an opportunity to buy this lens in ex + condition for the equivalent
of $188. Is this a good price?
And another question - I love 50/55mm lenses. Really liked my M 50/1.7, was
very fond of the FA 50/1.4, and now I'm a proud (and happy) owner of one K
55/1.8 and one K 50/1.4. But.
Hi Boz,
> SMC-FA 50/2.8 Macro What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good?
Optically it is the best Pentax lens I own...
> What do you use it for?
Macro work of course, and sometimes also as a normal lens. If I can take
only one lens with me, I often choose this lens...
> Wh
Hi,
SMC-FA 50/2.8 Macro
What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it
for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the lens
handling (weight, size, etc.)?
How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion,
bokeh, light fall-off
25 matches
Mail list logo
