I agree on it needing to be removable. The problem I have encountered from time to time with longer lenses without a tripod mount is that the times that I choose to use a tripod becomes much clumsier due to the heavier lens with only the support at the base of the camera. It is much harder for the lens to settle down. My K 200/2.5 is heavy enough that using it on a tripod is problematic. I wish it had a removable mount.
-- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, February 10, 2007, 8:06:56 AM, you wrote: JCOC> Doesnt sound that logical to me unless its removable. JCOC> DA lenses are generally small and light (compared to 35mm) and I really JCOC> dont see JCOC> why they would want to add weight to the lens all JCOC> the time for that, especially in light of AS technologies. JCOC> With regards to the NEED for the tripod mount, its JCOC> not only the focal length or effective focal length JCOC> that matters, its also whether the lens itself JCOC> has too much weight and too far away center of JCOC> gravity from the cameras tripod mount and this is JCOC> still only a 250mm slow lens which would seem marginal JCOC> to me for really needing a tripod mount in the first JCOC> place. JCOC> jco JCOC> -----Original Message----- JCOC> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] JCOC> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JCOC> Sylwester Pietrzyk JCOC> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 10:54 AM JCOC> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List JCOC> Subject: Re: Three new Pentax DA star lenses: any knowledge? JCOC> On 2007-02-10, at 16:35, Adam Maas wrote: >> The 60-250 was always announced for summer '07. JCOC> The 60-250 is rumoured to be delayed further because final version JCOC> would get tripod mount (sounds ligical for these focal length - 375 JCOC> mm equiv.) JCOC> Cheers, JCOC> Sylwek JCOC> -- JCOC> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List JCOC> PDML@pdml.net JCOC> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
