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 b
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.
T
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 si
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,
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 u
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
> accordi
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,
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 J
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
I got 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:
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 t
11 matches
Mail list logo
