At 21:46 13/12/01, you wrote: Hi Mick
I missed your earlier post in all the noise. :-) My 135/2.8 F series lens isn't used anywhere near enough. I use it as a short telephoto, mainly shooting horse racing, and mainly at night. I have no complaints with the lens at all. I haven't really used it for much portraiture, mainly because I really don't do any portraiture, so I won't comment on that aspect. As a short tele it works fine. I paid $225 AUD for mine, which at the time was about equivalent with what you can get it for. I was happy with the price and have been happy with the lens. Now that you've made me think about the lens I'll probably take it to the trots tomorrow night and use it fr the night. :-) One more thing. A year or so (maybe a couple of years ago) there was a discussion about 135mm lenses on the mailing list. IIRC someone posted, buggered if I can remember whom, that the 135mm lenses are probably the easiest for lens makers to get right. There seems to be less "bad" ones of any manufacturer than any other focal length. Or something like that. :-) Cheers >Mick Maguire wrote: > > Is this lens any good? what's it best suited for > > (portraiture etc)? Is it a reasonable buy at $165? > > any thoughts / opinions anybody? > >Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are >you all just ignoring me? > >Regards, >/\/\ick... >- >This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, >go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to >visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . Jon Relax! Take life as it comes, you can't chase the sun, you can't race the wind - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
