Alek, I find your constant questions about lens quality amusing. It's fun to read the responses from everyone. Let me add mine. Here it is... Get ready for it.... IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER... How's that for an opinion? I'm a firm believer that all GOOD lenses (That includes 95 per cent of Pentax lenses) Not necessarily GREAT lenses are capable of giving excellent results under the right circumstances with the proper technique. Proper technique is at least as important as the glass. I would hazard to guess that in many cases proper technique is more important than the glass. Many will disagree. Ignore them. I do. Take pictures. Get comfortable with the lenses and cameras you own. Buy what you can afford. Faster glass is not necessarily better than slower glass. It costs more because one stop more light costs a lot more to create. Unless you are shooting for National Geographic or something, who cares.... I've noticed more and more that people are using low-end digital cameras as a benchmark for quality. You are already was ahead of them with an SLR and a good lens. Vic
In a message dated 2/6/03 12:53:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >es, it is truth that many of my questions to you have already been answered. >So the only way is to mount my Tamron (when I get adaptall) and shoot and >shoot and then assess the quality. On the basis of many opinions and tests > it should be great macro lens I hope. and 90mm is also very nice for portraits >so nothing to add, just shoot! > >recently I thought to leave Pentax and buy Contax Aria+some primes but >probably it is better to stick to Pentax and hope that new solutions will >appear. And it is open system. > >I take mostly slides that is why I ask about quality of the lens so often. > >Cheers, > >Alek > >PS Have you ever used K lenses?
