Hi Peter, Doug and all,
Peter Jesser wrote:
Has anyone had one of these? Got any thoughts on it?
...
Yes I have it. I didn't use it a lot but if you think it would be useful
I could post some samples to the net.
It doesn't seem so bad for me, but I have nothing to compare it to.
Is not a
Hi Frits,
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:47:22 +0100, Frits J. Wthrich wrote:
Anybody know how well a Pentax A 400mm f5.6 is? What would be a reasonable
price for it?
I don't know how much better it is than the SMC version, since I've
never tried one. Right now, there are a couple on Keh's web
Doug Franklin wrote:
Hi Frits,
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:47:22 +0100, Frits J. W*thrich wrote:
Anybody know how well a Pentax A 400mm f5.6 is? What would be a reasonable
price for it?
I don't know how much better it is than the SMC version, since I've
never tried one.
They're
I meant to say, I covet the A, not I cover the A. Although if I had
one, I would cover it. Right now, I just covet it.
Paul
Doug Franklin wrote:
Hi Frits,
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:47:22 +0100, Frits J. W*thrich wrote:
Anybody know how well a Pentax A 400mm f5.6 is? What would be a
Doug wrote:
I have the SD version of this lens in PK-A mount, but I haven't tried
it yet. I'll be trying it out the first weekend of October, if there's
room in by bag. I've been using an SMC 400/5.6, so that will be
benchmark against which I'm judging the Tokina. TTYL, DougF
Doug,
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 18:57:27 +0200, canislupus wrote:
when you get around to trying [the Tokina SD 400/5.6],
please post your results here.
Will do.
I am much interested how a semi-modern SD/LD/APO tele compares to
an older much simpler tele design I think the SMC K 400/5.6 is
according
Hi,
when you look at the Tokina 400/f5.6 with inner focusing, look at the out
of foucus areas. I did and had a big laugh. Really ugly quadruple images!
I'll stick to my Pentax K 400/f5.6 even though it is bigger and all
manual
Arnold
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
Peter Jesser writes:
Has anyone had one of these? Got any thoughts on it?
I have one, got it for NZ$200 at a second hand shop. I'm surprised the one
you saw was M42 mount though (mine is bayonet). Its actually not too bad a
lens if you can stop it down. I've found it quite soft wide-open
Hi Peter
Ouch! I have never found PC to be competitive on price, although they are a
very professional organisation! They're current price for the MZ-S body is
A$1898.00.
Where in Brissy are you (I'm in New Farm)?
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
On Sunday, September 16, 2001 1:17 PM, Peter
Hi Peter:
I have the RMC 400/5.6, in bayonet mount, so probably a little later than the
one you are thinking of. It's big, heavy, built like a tank and has excellent
resolution, even wide open, in the centre. Unfortunately, mine does not have a
tripod collar, which can be a problem.
I would
it from Photo Continental. I'm a Brisbane boy, too!
Peter
From: John Coyle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Tokina SL 400 mm f5.6
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 11:43:00 +1000
Hi Peter:
I have the RMC 400/5.6, in bayonet mount, so
11 matches
Mail list logo
