So, what about it? I wasn't sure that there was a 50/1.7 past the A series, that's why I said " I don't think there was ..." Otherwise I'd have said that there wasn't a 50/1.7 made ..."
Shel Why in Hell should I have to Press 1 for English?!!! > [Original Message] > From: Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > Date: 3/13/2007 5:01:56 PM > Subject: RE: Macro Lenses > > Hi Shel > What about the Pentax-F 1:1.7. Ugly military look but should be quite good > on a DSLR? > greetings > Markus > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Shel Belinkoff > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:37 AM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Macro Lenses > > > It has been said here quite a few times that the 50/1.7 is a better macro > lens, but I don't think there was a 1.7 past the M or A series. That said, > I could never tell the difference between the M50/1.4 and the M50/1.7 when > used with xtension tubes and when the lenses were used stopped down to 5.8 > or smaller apertures. I don't ever recall using either lens at anything > wider than 5.6 .... > > Shel > > > [Original Message] > > From: William Robb > > Frankly, if you want a 50mm macro, > > get a 50/1.4 and a set of extension > > tubes, it will probably serve you better > > as general purpose equipemnt than a > > slow 50mm macro lens. > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
