I can relate to that: I have one of the most expensive Pentax MEs in the
world - and once had a similar Canonet G III. But after the CLAs I knew what
I had. I´m going to have an expensive Rollei 35 S in the near future.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Jordan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net>
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA
There is something strangely satisfying in spending more than the cost of
a replacement on a CLA.
A psychologist would be able to explain better, but it's something to do
with the bond that forms between a man and his (delete as applicable) LX /
MX / K50mm f/1.4 / M85 mm f/2 .......
Or perhaps I'm just crazy.
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net>
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: 50mm/F2 lens worth a CLA
Probably not, you should be able to find one that doesn't need a CLA for
less than the CLA would cost.
-Adam
Barry Rice wrote:
Hey Folks,
I just found an old pentax M 50/2 lens. I've already got a Pentax
M50/1.4
and an F 50/2.8 macro.
This 50/2 lens is in good shape, but would need a CLA before it would be
even sellable. Is there any compelling reason to keep this lens? Any
secrets
about it, like "oh, man this lens is sweet when reversed" or anything
like
that?
B
Barry A. Rice, Ph.D.
Invasive Species Specialist
Global Invasive Species Initiative
The Nature Conservancy
V: 530-754-8891
http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu
