The last shot was just a view of the markings on the same lens that
was in the other shots -- which is the Vivitar 80-200/4.5.
I have to say, of all the lenses I got for the $200, the one I like
least is the Pentax 28-80. I'm really disappointed in what I've gotten
from it based on just a few test shots. It's not very sharp at all to
my eye, but I'm hoping it'll perform better when I take it out for some
real world-type shooting. And the Sigma isn't much better.
I have to say I've been pleasantly surprised with the Tokina and the
Vivitar, though. They both are much sharper than I'd expected, which is
nice since I essentially considered them to be the bad that you have to
take with the good.
Still, I'm getting closer to having a good complement of lenses across
the focal range spectrum, usable on both my K1000 and my K-x. I don't
have a true wide-angle or fisheye yet, but maybe someday soon.
-- Walt
On 2/3/2011 12:10 AM, Christine Aguila wrote:
Can't say I recognize the last lens. Cheers, Christine
----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Gilbert" <ldott...@gmail.com>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: Re-emerging, announcing enablement
Thanks, Christine. :-)
Believe it or not, I've actually been taking pictures like crazy
lately, but it's all been political candidates and whatnot -- you
know, kindling for flame wars. So, I've been concentrating on that
and creating & running an associated blog. And that's why I haven't
been participating as much in the list of late. But, now I seem to
have things somewhat in-hand. Hence, my ability to seek enablement
and post news of my recent acquisitions. Speaking of which . . .
I took some shots of the useless lens, I got along with the others.
I was actually able to pull out the bayonet and straighten it so that
it actually works now. It could use some cleaning up, and it's by no
means a pretty lens. But, it is functional. I thought I'd post the
shots here to see if anyone might recognize it. As I mentioned
before, it's an 80-200/4.5 - 5.6 with a minimum aperture of 22, made
in Japan -- apparently on 6/20/1983 according to the little sticker
by the "Lens made in Japan" stamp.
http://i54.tinypic.com/r9elc7.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/2upteys.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/24l0lzs.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/f4rce1.jpg
Does this thing look familiar at all to anyone? There's absolutely
no writing around the front element -- just some exposed threads
around the outer diameter. It's a push-pull type zoom, with the
letters "P K" stamped in green on the aperture ring.
-- Walt
On 2/2/2011 7:28 PM, Christine Aguila wrote:
Sounds like good enablement. Now go take some pictures! :-)
Cheers, Christine
----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Gilbert"
<ldott...@gmail.com>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:24 PM
Subject: Re-emerging, announcing enablement
Hi all,
In my absence from the list -- which, to the extent it was noticed,
must have been greatly appreciated -- I've managed to procure a few
goodies for a not-bad price, I think, but thought I'd get the
opinions of folks more knowledgeable than myself. I actually got a
whole bunch of stuff -- filters, hoods, and one useless lens which
I haven't the foggiest notion what it might be other than an
80-200/4.5 macro with a bent bayonet. Beyond that, however, I got
the following:
Tokina SZ-X 28-200 3.5-5.3
Pentax SMC FA 28-80 3.5-4.7
Sigma 24-70 3.5-5.6 UC
. . . and last but not least:
SMC PENTAX 1:1.4/50
All lenses are in fair to excellent condition, except for the
M-50/1.4, which appears to have never been attached to anything.
The threads don't even appear to have ever had a filter screwed
into them. There is something odd about the lens, that I thought
I'd ask about, though nothing performance-wise. It's just that the
printing around the front element is ever-so-slightly different
from what I've seen in images of the same lens around the web. The
imprint says:
ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN -- Pentax SMC M-50/1.4 -- 1093350
The other lenses I've seen have "mm" appended after the "50" --
except for those labeled SMC TAKUMAR, instead of SMC PENTAX. Is
this indicative of anything significant at all? I'm in absolute
love with the lens, whatever the case. It took some effort to
convince myself to take it off the K-x in order to try out the
other lenses. But, I finally did (and regretted it, as they all
pale considerably).
Whatever the case, I think I got a pretty damned good deal on it
all, considering I'm out a grand total of $200.00 US collectively.
I figure I came out OK by way of enablement for that kind of dough.
Best,
Walt
--
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.
