That lens probaly wouldnt be that well balanced on an MX or MG :)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 1:36 PM
Subject: Re: FA 28-70 f2.8


> Hi Pål,
>
> That doesn't bother me, because I don't have an automatic Pentax. I plan
> to use this lens on my MG and my MX. Manual only.
> Ought to give me many years of use before it kicks the dust...
> I'll never be able to say it's a bad lens, so long as I don't run it on
power...!
>
> Thanks for the report...  keith
>
> Pål Jensen wrote:
> >
> > Apart from the hassle of a rotating front lens tube, my lens was plagued
with all kinds of recurring problems. I owned it for 2 years and it spent
1,5 of those at service. It was unable to power zoom past the 35mm setting.
Lots of samples of this lens have the same fault. It is a design weakness.
The power zoom button came loose - repeatedly. It was fixed equally
repededly but it always came loose again. Power zoom stopped working
completely and the lens needed about 1 hour rest in order for the power zoom
to work again. When this was fixed, a sluggish aperture mechanism was the
result. When this was fixed, power zoom stopped working again etc...etc.
etc.... This went on for years - in and out if service fixing new problems
and promtly after returned older problems came back. I finally throwed the
lens in the garbage....Before throwing it away, I dissasembled it and
figured out that the lens could never be made to work. The contacts for
power zoom touched the aperture mech!
>  an!
> >  ism when they had contact with the electrical contacts on the lens
mount. In order to free the aperture mechanism you had to bend the contacts
away. This meant that contact with the lens mounts contact could not be
ensured. Basically you had a choice of working aperture or working power
zoom.
> > It was the largest piece of shit I've ever owned (optically it is just
fine) and if it wasn't for the release of the 43 Limited I would have been a
Nikon owner by now.
> >
> > Pål
>

Reply via email to