Of course, but a FA-J (Junior) Limited lens? Alex Sarbu
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 17:05:54 +0100, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > These are supposed to be FA-J aren't they? > > ------------------------ > Thibouille > > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 17:30:13 +0200, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Maybe the only reason it's named a DA lens (and not D-FA) is the lack > > of aperture ring? > > It seems too good to be true... unfortunatelly, it won't match a ME Super :( > > Well, time to get a Super Program <grin> > > > > Alex Sarbu > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 09:51:20 -0500, Lindamood, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > First, Rod Studdert's spider shot posted below is way terrific, despite > > > his lousy gear. Good on ya! Here's it's north american cousin through a > > > 100mm F and a bad scanner. > > > > > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=001U4Q&photo_id=265367&photo_sel_index=0 > > > > > > Second, Margus Mannik's observation of no DA 40mm vignetting through the > > > PZ-1p viewfinder is also terrific. Several have posted that the DA > > > lenses throw only an APS-size image circle, but I can't see any reason > > > why that's the case. The DA 40mm objective element is exactly the same > > > size as the original pancake, and the entire lens formulation is probably > > > similar. Why would it throw a smaller circle? > > > > > > What I'm getting at is whether the lens will work on the other Pentax > > > bodies despite being advertised as exclusive to the *ist bodies. Maybe > > > Pentax is just trying to avoid sales competition with the 43 > > > ltd.????????? Margus, can you post one of your shots with that nice DA > > > 40mm lens? > > > > > > http://www.eol.ee/~margus/arvutikasutaja/pancake.jpg > > > > > > > > > > > >
