At 10:22 PM 2/18/04, you wrote:
> Pentax has not used usm etc. for AF. A disadvantage of using > it is that you disenfranchise all older lenses; Pentax's > mechanical solution means that old and new lenses work on > old and new cameras. >
This is something less and less real. I'm thinking the FAJ and de DA lenses on my MZS
> The FA28-70/4 has a good reputation for quality and a > reputation for mechanical build which is consistent with its > low price. It is ok, not the greatest. All in all this lens > is suburb value - available at KEH in EX+ for just over > $100, available on eBay for $75-100 in very good condition. > About the only lenses of this quality available readily for > that price that I can think of offhand would be the FA, A, > or M50/1.4, the M135/3.5, maybe the A70-210. > > Stan > > chibitul smecher wrote: > > > Hi, does Pentax use the ultrasound technology found in some Canon and > > Nikon lenses? I have a ZX-5n and I see that it uses a shaft (cannot find > > a better word) to achieve the auto-focus, IOW the motor is in the camera > > and there is a mechanical coupling between body and lens. This is not > > very quiet :(... I see there are a few other contact on the lens mount, > > so I wonder if other more expensive lenses got the ultrasound auto-focus > > motor. I only have a zoom 28-70 f/4 AL lens. > > > > what about lenses where the front element does NOT rotate? using a > > polarizer filter with 28-70 f/4 is not fun. And BTW, while others seem > > to like the optical quality of this lens, I see very few that actually > > mention the poor mechanical build. > > > > >
I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan
