IMHO the 105 is a great performer and quite inexpensive. Norm Paul Stenquist wrote: > Both the 105 and the 98 have their supporters and detractors. I have > the 105 and have been very happy with it. But if you would like to go > wider, the 75/2.8 appears to be a fabulous lens. That was Aaron's > favorite, and most of the pics he posted here were shot with that > lens. However, it's only a few years old, so is pricier than the > others. I would avoid the 75/4.5. The reviews are very mixed. Perhaps > there is sample variation, and it may well be telling that Pentax > chose to replace it with an upgraded lens. > Paul > Paul > On Aug 30, 2007, at 5:46 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > > >> The 67 I've bought is coming without a lens and I'l looking for >> recommendations about a choice of normal lens. I seem to recall that >> the 105/2.4 is better regarded than the 90/2.8, but I think I'd still >> prefer the shorter focal length, personally. An alternative I'd >> consider would be a 75mm f/4.5, although it's a bit slow for a normal >> lens. Any comments on any of this? Other suggestions? >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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
