[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK maybe you dunno but Angenieux was one of thse brands (like Leica lens eg) which are just excellent everywhere. A 28-70mm 2.8 was excellent at 28 at 2.8 as well as as 70mm. No distortion, no vignetting... nothing.
True, but... this particular one is a bit of a dog, isn't it. Marks and cleaning marks on the front element, cleaning marks on the rear element, and the body is not all that pristine...
Why pay for the best of the lot, if it's [probably] no longer able to compete with unsullied lenses?
Seems way out of line, considering it's condition.
Used to be top of the line, perhaps, but it's been abused along the way, hasn't it.
Not worth it.
keith whaley
They ran out of business 'cos... well not enough people to buy these I guess. But the equivallent zoom from Nikon/Pentax/minolta/Canon were at least half the price... end were pretty good.
thibouille----- Message Initial ----- De
: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoy?
: Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 01:37 PM
A
: 'Kostas Kavoussanakis'
Objet
: Re: 'dem French
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Frantisek wrote:
KK> Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK> well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings?
Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? <grin, duck & run>
(I have a few but only give you the relevant one) Because they already have investment in the other mount? The Angenieux in that auction is an M42 (so not even the best Pentax -- let alone Nikon :-P -- bayonet can compete with that if you have a Spottie), at 1200 dollars. There must be a compelling reason for that (which I am casually looking for).
Kostas
