On 8 Mar 2002 at 17:26, jmadams wrote: > I've got the Super-Takumar 135/3.5! How does it compare with the > 135/2.5 for portraits? I've had a 135/3.5 for years, but never used > it much. Mostly use my Super Tak 105/2.5. James
The 135/3.5 is a good lens. The Tak 135/2.5 is a very soft mushy turd, and therefore can work as a cheap portrait lens for those who like a soft lens for that sort of thing. Personally, I like to stun people with the FA 645 120/4 macro, but that's just me. Yes dear, your skin *is* that crappy. tv - 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 .
