I love my 16-50, and my clients love the results. I did have to return
the first one I bought, but that was a result of the uneven focus
plane problem that plagued some early examples. It was easy to spot,
and I'm sure it was long ago resolved.
Paul
On Nov 9, 2008, at 9:36 AM, Toine wrote:
I didn't say that. What they measure must be true and the 16-50 was
the third sample. Maybe I'm very lucky in sample variations. I didn't
try my luck on the 16-50...
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:26 PM, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Toine wrote:
After reading this review I wouldn't dare buying this lens. As a
reference Photozone trashed the 50-200 completely. For pixelpeeping
fun I got this lens a few days ago for very little money (thanks
photozone!). The 50-200 is simply amazing (if you stop it down one
or
two steps).
They also think my other lenses are middle of the road or worse.
ROFL!
So I take it that Photozone has replaced Photodo as the bullshit
lens test
wank-fest site of choice these days?
--
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.
--
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.
--
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.
