Dear Discerning Pentaxer, I like your approach. I have just made a belated new years Resolution, and I, too, shall become more discerning and discrimination.
>From now on all lenses shall be checked with computer-controlled, digitally operated, multi-function test equipment for focusing torque characteristics, sound quality and loudness when focusing, mounting torque (there's nothing I hate more than having to apply too much or two little pressure to twist a lens on to the camera), coating reflectance, hardness of the rubber around the focusing ring, and aperture ring stiffness. The information will be compared to a set of preferred parameters in the computer database, and will generate a pass/fail result as well as a print out of how each lens parameter compares with my preferred parameter. These figures will also be tied into the Universal Pentax Lens Database which keeps track of the rarity of specific lenses, and in that way I will be able to decide immediately if it's worth acquiring a given lens should some of its qualities fall outside the predetermined preferred parameters. IOW, I might consider a K20/1.4 even if the focusing was a little stiff, but an M28/2.8 would not be given such leeway. Fred wrote: > Thanks for your vote of confidence, Shel. However, I think I'm > going to start using a different terminology - I'm no longer "picky" > - from now on I am going to be a "discerning" user, a > "discriminating" Pentaxer - <g>. (In other words, I'll continue to > be picky, but I'll simply be in "stealth mode".) -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ "Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money" - 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 .
