That optical formula chart is amazing. Look at how they totally cheap out on the Tokina 135. They omit a rear group in the spiratone that the sigma has and the pentax looks like it has further corrective glass. No ED glass. Fascinating. The Zeiss glass looks like the one to get. Go figure. I'm guessing its A-Mount only.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Don Guthrie <shark50...@gmail.com> wrote: > OOPS let me see if I can clear this up. I mis-rememered. It was late it was > dark I did not have lens in front of me. OK I'm old. My 135mm f1.8 is indeed > the Spiratone. I thought I had owned the 85mm but it was the 135. > But I was sure when I was hunting up this lens I saw a JC Penny Label. And > I did, it was on a 28-80 3.5 tele . I also found my 90-230 Sears tele. The > JC Penny is a K- mount the other two are the old 42. Using various adapters > I tested these on K-01 and Oly 4/3s. > I also tested some Canon tread mount lenses from a rangefinder camera with > bad results - they only focus close-up nothing beyond a few inches. > > Photos when I get time. Sorry about confusion but thanks for forcing me > into the storeroom. > > > pdml-requ...@pdml.net wrote: >> >> Message: 2 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:02:50 -0400 From: "J.C. O'Connell" >> <hifis...@gate.net> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> Subject: Re: Is the A* 135mm f1.8 on your Bucket List? Message-ID: >> <526edf0a.5060...@gate.net> Content-Type: text/plain; >> >> charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 10/28/2013 5:50 PM, Darren Addy >> wrote: >>> >>> >Not necessarily. m42 135mm f1.8s were manufactured by Sigma, Mitake, >>> >and Tokina (at the very least) and sold under a variety of brand >>> >names. >>> >Still, I'd love to see pictures, as I've never before heard of a JC >>> >Penney branded version. >>> > >>> >I doubt if one would confuse the image quality of one of those with >>> >the A* 135mm f1.8 or the Zeiss version (natch). Still, one could have >>> >some fun! >> >> I had a Sigma back in the film days that I bought at the Miami >> International Camera >> show back in the late 80's new old stock in the box. It was single >> coated and was a flare >> magnet and was bulky as hell on the front of my spotmatic without any >> addtional >> grip. Never used it much, sold it off in the late 90's with most of my >> other none pentax >> lenses. >> >>> > >>> >On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Larry Colen<l...@red4est.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>I think that someone is confusing the JC Penny 2.8 with a 1.8. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >>On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 04:14:30PM -0500, Darren Addy wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>I'm guessing that Don is being serious. I'd love to see some photos >>>>> >>> of >>>>> >>>that lens, Don! Does it have a tripod foot on it? How many aperture >>>>> >>>blades. Inquiring minds want to know! >>>>> >>>:) >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 3:42 PM, J.C. O'Connell<hifis...@gate.net> >>>>> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>On 10/28/2013 3:40 PM, Don Guthrie wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>I would sure sell my 135mm f1.8 JC Penny Pentax screw mount lens >>>>>>> >>>>> for less >>>>>>> >>>>>than that. Although it does take some interesting photos on my >>>>>>> >>>>> micro 4/3 >>>>>>> >>>>>Oly. Thanks Darren for causing me to dig it out storage. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>Are you joking or did jc penny actually sell a 135mm f1.8 lens??? > > > > -- > 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.
