No it's not bad. DA lenses are guaranteed to cover 16x24 but may cover a larger format. That's the only guaranteed there is. It hurts nothing if they cover a larger format.
J. C. O'Connell wrote: > If the comments below are true, it's bad. The lens designation > should convey if a lens wont cover 24x36mm IMHO. A APS-C only > lens is not the same thing as a 24x36 lens and there should be > an easy way to know by the lens designation IMHO. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Godfrey DiGiorgi > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 3:37 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: DA70 and 24x36 coverage > > > On Oct 1, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > >> I am asking my question mainly because if it indeed covered full frame >> > > >> and there were no image deterioration past the APC frame, Pentax >> probably would have given it FDA designation instead of DA. >> > > The D-FA mount includes an aperture ring control. DA lenses do not. > > The DA70 has no aperture ring control, it was design for use with the > digital SLR bodies. Whether it actually covers 24x36 mm format isn't > really relevant to the mount designation. > > Godfrey > > --- > Not really relevant but interesting: > > In the course of researching my latest lens acquisition, I saw an > article about someone who took an M42 mount Pentax Fish-Eye-Takumar > 17mm lens and cobbled up a mount to fit it on a 6x6 rollfilm folder > with behind-lens leaf shutter. His goal was to make circular fish eye > images inexpensively ... it produced an image circle ~ 45mm in > diameter on the 6x6 format film, which suited his needs perfectly. > --- > > > > > -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
