This is just an observation. If a lens I own says 18mm on it and it's really 18.75mm, it's no big deal to me, and I'm not going to start building a database of the "exact" tested focal lengths. Hell, labs probably crop all of our prints, and slide holders crop our slides, more than that. I can always step back an inch or so, if I need the extra coverage.
I can see it all now, "L00K! MINTY, RARE PENTAX 18.001mm Lens..." Do you have any idea what perfection costs? If all of those lenses were built to zero tolerance, I wouldn't be able to afford any of them. Len --- -----Original Message----- From: andre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 2:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: f:22, K18/3.5 warmth, 20mm bee's nest... >At 21:06 28.4.2002 -0400, Andre wrote: >>> >Where did you learn that? [K18/3.5 actually being >>>19mm] Mine seems awfully wide.... >>> >>>It was right here on PDML last week (sorry, I havenít >>>gotten to know the posters on a first name basis so I >>>canít give credit here). >> >>I git it from Modern Photography (April 1983) >>K 18/3.5 #5 288 XXX was measured at 18,75 mm f/3,54. >>I rounded it to 19mm... Pretty close to 18mm anyway. > >How about the 20mm lenses ? I bet they are closer to 21mm for real... > >Antti-Pekka I only have the M 20/4 which is 20.4mm f/3.95. I have magazines from '76 to '85 only... It would be interesting to build an archive about results from photo magazines' tests, now that there is a good one about opinions from users. Andre -- - 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 . - 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 .
