You have got too strong hands!?

Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt


-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 26. januar 2005 23:43
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ?


Fred mused:
>
> > personally, I found the KA version less reliable, because often the
> > contacts were just a tiny bit off and didn't make proper contact. It
> > sure freaked me out when suddently I couldn't take a photo. I threw it
> > out afterwards. Having to rotate the lens a bit on/off to be able to
> > get a photograph is not my idea of good design...
>
> This is exactly the same as my experience with the Ka-mount version of the
> Adaptall-2 mount - a little "flaky".  And "flaky" does not make for
> dependability.  However, I do know that others have said they've never had
> a problem.

Actually I suspect what you're running into here is a problem with the
KA mount itself, not with the Adaptall-2 per se.  I did notice that when
I had the Tamron 300/2.8 with an Adaptall-2 mount I quite often got a bad
contact somewhere; quite often the A pin itself would have a flaky contact,
so the camera wasn't quite sure whether this was a lens set to the "A"
position, or a lens with the aperture set to f32.  This led to some rather
interesting shots; I was expecting an exposure of something like 1/750 @ f4,
and suddenly the viewfinder blanked out for 1/10 of a second or so!

Third-party equipment (Tamron Adaptall lenses, Sigma AF teleconverters,
etc.)
do seem particularly susceptible to this problem, but I've even run into it
using my Pentax 80-200/2.8 on my PZ-1p; if I hold the lens just the wrong
way, and put just the wrong amount of stress on the lens-body coupling,
then the "A" pin only makes intermittent contact.



Reply via email to