> I have one and love it. I used to have one, and found it to be a good telephoto zoom. It was rather large of course, but, if you need the speed, the bulk and weight are worthwhile sacrifices. The detachable tripod mount is a nice feature. Optically, I remember that it had pretty decent flare suppression (considering that it was not a jen-you-wine Pentax Ess-Emm-See lens - <g>), which was good, because the clip-on hood was easily knocked off. I also (from memory) think that it was pretty sharp throughout its range (unlike many zooms that go a little soft at their long end).
> Performance degradation depends on the mark. A tiny mark on the > front element will affect contrast somewhat. It't not a good > thing, but can be lived with. If the mark isn't actually an obvious gouge into the glass, just ignore it. If it is really a gouge or "dig" into the glass, you can very carefully fill in the "divot" with a fine-point black permanent marker (e.g., a "Sharpie"). Avoid blackening the glass surface outside the actual gouge, though - keep the blackening only where it is needed. This procedure may improve contrast slightly, especially if the walls of jagged glass inside the gouge are scattering light around significantly. (I've done this once before with a "user" A 35-105/3.5 zoom.) Fred - 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 .
