Re: OT: No Pull for 1 stop, right?
Let it be Glenn. Like most C-41 films, Superia XTra 800 will benefit from 1 stop of overexposure--sharper, more saturated. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: For the love of an LX
Amateur Photographer compared the Canon F1, Nikon F3, and Pentax LX. The editors were impressed by them all, but preferred the Canon for its flexibilty; they were disappointed that the LX couldn't do program or shutter priority. You can buy a reprint of the review at http://www.oldtimercameras.com/ . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Another online summary of 50mm lens tests
http://www.xitek.com/testreport/xitek/biaotou.htm It's in an Asian language. There are three charts. Chart 1 compares measured focal length, measured max. aperture, distortion, and EV (EV light loss?). Results are from Modern Photography. Chart 2 compares center and corner resolution. I can't determine where the results are from; presumably Modern Photography. The Pentax 50/1.4F kicks butt. Chart 3 compares center and corner contrast at a fixed resolution, as measured by Amateur Photographer. I wish I knew which magazine rated the Rikenon P 50/1.4 above the new Contax. In the tests summarized here, it's nothing special. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: SMC-A*85mm 1.4 on eBay
Frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only I had the money... As boxer Joe Lewis put it, It don't matter if you're rich or if you're poor, as long as you got money. :) - 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 .
Re: SMC-A*85mm 1.4 on eBay
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'll shit pearls when you see the B.I.N price... That's great, Cotty! I can sell the pearls and buy the lens. :) - 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 .
Re: Rikenon P lens lineup (was: FS: XR Rikenon Macro 28-100/4, $90)
Jim Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul, Will a Ricoh P series lens work in program mode on an A series Pentax such as a Super Program? Jim, No. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
My 105 macro for your 90 macro?
My Kiron 105/2.8 1:1 macro is too close to my 135 to get as much general use as I'd like. (My next focal length down is a 50.) Is anyone interested taking it in trade for their Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 PK with 1:1 adapter? As many PDMLers know, the Kiron is the same lens that Vivitar sold as the Series 1 105/2.5K. Both 105s began as PKs and were replaced by PKAs; mine is the original PK. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Thoughts on the tamron 35-105 2.8 zoom lens
Wayne, My collected comments follow. My personal thoughts: It's so much more expensive than slower zooms, I don't think it's worth the premium. The Pentax SMC 35-105/3.5 PKA is said to be so outstanding, you'd have to be brain-dead to spend much more for the Tamron. Collected comments: AF version not available in Pentax mount; weighs 2 oz. more. Detachable lens hood included. Terry, Nikon posting: I own the Tamron 90/2.5 Macro MF and the Tamron 35-105/2.8. IMO, they are both great lenses. The 35-105 basically stays on my F90X as its standard lens. Christian (Contax mount): At f/2.8 brilliance is low, esp. compared to Zeiss lenses, but at f/4 or f/5.6 the brilliance improves to prime standard and at f/4 the resolution is also in the same region. At 105mm you can see a 2% line curving which is not up to Zeiss standard, but good for a zoom. Sharpness, 8; Color, 9; Optics, 8; Convenience, 7; Mechanics, 8. Composite results from four reviewers on www.cmpsolv.com: Performance wide open, OK short, good long; Performance stopped down, good short, very good long; Vignetting, little short, none long; Distortion, critical short, signif. long; Color, slightly warm; Flare, heavy; AF speed, slow; build quality, good. Wai Chan: I had the SP 35-105mm f2.8 ASL which was expensive but poor both optically and mechanically (my biggest mistake on lens purchase, not even my previous Sigma lenses gave me so much trouble). Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
FS: threaded black metal hoods and step-up rings
49mm Takumar for 135/3.5, 150/4, or 200/5.6, 60mm wide, 52mm deep, (two available); just $6 each because each has has band of white typing cover-up tape that will need to be removed. 52mm wide-angle Adorama brand (says Aroma; made in India), 94mm wide, 20mm deep, $8 58mm wide-angle Adorama brand (says Aroma; made in India), 94mm wide, 20mm deep, $8 58mm Samigon for short normal lenses (40 to 50mm), 62mm wide, 24mm deep, $5 67mm Pentax MH-RA67, the beauty designed for the 85/1.4A and the 120/4 macro for 645 or 67, 57mm long, 110mm wide, mint, $16 (no case) 72mm generic for long telephotos (200 to 400 mm), 2mm thick, 83mm wide, 81mm deep, new, $19 72mm generic for long telephotos (200 to 400 mm), 2mm thick, 83mm wide, 81mm deep, some scuff marks and black tape, $14 67-72mm step-up ring, Kalt, $8 67-77mm step-up ring, Kalt, $8 10 percent discount on orders of 2 or more; 15 percent discount on orders of 3 or more. Photos are available for most of these. Shipping $3 per order within the USA, $5 per order to Canada, $10 elsewhere. PayPal, BidPay, money order, personal check. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: SMC - A 70 - 210 macro ratio
It's 1:4 throughout the standard range, 1:3 when the Macro setting is engaged at 70mm. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Definition of 'portrait' (was: Re: Cotty's June PUG review PART2)
I haven't been following this thread, but Ann's response to Cotty has drawn me in. If you had asked me a month ago, I would have sided with the curmudgeons who say a portrait must include a person. I say include, and not be chiefly composed of, because no one who has seen the arresting portrait of the famous pianist at the very edge of a photo of his piano could doubt that it is a consummate portrait. (The names of the pianist, the photographer, and the piano escape me. Anyone?) At any rate, Ann's response, as well as others I've glimpsed, have broadened my understanding of what a portrait can be. A closeup of the clasped wrinkled hands of a long-married couple? You bet. An animal? Absolutely. A shadow? If it showed a barber at work, yes. A shadow of an animal? If it showed a cat pouncing at its prey--at work, as it were. (For that matter, sleeping would qualify for a cat.) At the recent Bat Mitzvah dance, I took a photo of the shoes that the 13-year-old girls had doffed in close, haphazard formation before racing to the dance floor. I regret not taking a floor-level shot of their dancing feet. Would these have counted as portraits? In my book, yes. As Forrest Gump remarked, My momma always said, 'You can tell a lot about a person by the shoes they wear.' Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Please share some of your experience with different brand flashes
Don't overlook the range of tilt-swivel units sold at Ritz Camera under the Quantaray name, OEM'd by a better-known brand. I especially like the Quantaray units with a removable, modular base. You can snap off a base for Pentax manual focus and snap in a base for Pentax autofocus...or other brand, for that matter. You can buy one large flash (GN 130) and one compact flash (GN 80), interchanging the bases as needed. Accessories such as the Sto-Fen Omni-Fiash diffuser can be used, no problem. Recently the Pentax and Ricoh TTL bases were consolidated; you can now use the same base for a Super Program and a Ricoh XR-P. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Pentax 50s: Which series is most plentiful (was: Re: nabbed a 55/1.8K)
Pål wrote: While it's true that the K lenses were made for only two years there were in fact made a few million more K and M lenses than Pentax screw mount lenses. So I guess the most common 50mm lenses from Pentax are the K and M. A quick scan of the Pentax sections of EBay and KEH suggests that the 50/1.4 was more common during the Takumar (screwmount) days. When switching to K mount, Pentax seems to have bundled most of its bodies with 50/1.7s and 50/2s. The situation is even grimmer with Ricoh. About the only fast (f/1.4) Rikenon 50s I've seen are in screwmount. (I owned one but never used it; Takumar-quality build.) The world is awash with XR Rikenon 50/2s and Rikenon P 50/2s. But I have seen just one or two XR Rikenon 50/1.4s and no Rikenon P 50/1.4s. (If you see the latter for sale, please tell me!) Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
National Geographic (was: Re[2]: Lens Sharpness?)
Frantisek wrote: PFS We compare our photos to those in National Geographic. FV Which doesn't tell you ANYTHING about sharpness or lens qualities :) and Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] replied: As unexpected as it may seem, it was a touch of humour from Paul's part. ;o) Actutally, Franticek correctly inferred that by not including a smiley :) I was being serious. I guess I'm remembering the National Geographic of old, because the sharpness of its photos blew me away (impressed me greatly). I would also strip the smiley off the end of the remark, by another PDMLer, that he knows whether a lens is sharp enough by reading it on the Internet. What is so absurd about that? If several PDMLers have used the same two lenses and draw the same conclusions--the one wasn't all that sharp, the other is--doesn't that tell you something? If it doesn't we're all wasting a lot of time reading everyone's remarks. If I told you where there was an 85/1.4 PKA* for sale for $250 in EX+ condition but could never resell it, wouldn't you buy it? Most of use would...based chiefly on what we've read on this list. (I added but could never resell it strictly to discourage the reply, I'd buy it for $250 and resell it for $1000.) Heck, I'd hock my wedding ring to buy it. --Wait, Honey, I was only kidding! Ouch! Hey, that hurts!... Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
a motherlode of Rikenon P 50/1.4s
Camera West in California has 10 Rikenon P 50/1.4 lenses for sale! Just one problem: They're attached to XR-10 bodies (9+ condition); you must buy body and lens (I asked), for $225. The ad doesn't say P but I inquired and got confirmation that these are, indeed, the P lens, a 7-element, 6-group, multicoated, metal-body lens (52mm filter) which outperformed the Contax 50/1.4 in one test, at least at wider apertures. The store also has 10 Rikenon 105/2.8 macro lenses at $195 each. http://www.camerawest.com/cgi-bin/browse.pl Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
55/1.2K clones: not all the same
Just when Fred has the Takumar 50/1.4s sorted out-- You know how I and others have written that the various 55/1.2K lenses from Chinon, Cosina, Porst, Vivitar, and Revue are all the same? Well, they're not. I discovered this yesterday, when saving some photos of two Revuenons and a Porst from http://www.arsenal-photo.com On the Cosinon, Revuenon MC, Vivitar, and Porst Color Reflex MC Auto, the aperture can be stopped down to f/16. BUT On the Porst Color Reflex MC Auto Pre-Series, the aperture can be stopped down to f/22. I have no idea what Pre-Series means, but in my photos the Pre-Series appears to have a bluer, more beautiful multicoating, even though the lens itself looks like an older design. Like most of these 55/1.2Ks, the Rikenon stops down to f/16. However, Popular Photography reported that the Rikenon's diaphragm has 9 blades. The Porst Color Reflex MC Auto clearly has 8 blades. The only other 55/1.2K that I know has 9 blades was the Vivitar Series 1 prototype (f/16). Summing up, we find that the 55/1.2Ks fall into three camps: 1. f/16, 8 blades (Cosinon, Porst Color Reflex MC Auto, Revuenon MC) 2. f/16, 9 blades (Rikenon, Vivitar Series 1 prototype) 3. f/22, unknown number of blades (Porst Color Reflex MC Auto Pre-Series) To which of these groups do the Chinon 55/1.2K and the Vivitar production 55/1.2K belong? I don't know; but the Vivitar came out in 1976, predating the others by many years. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
RE: nabbed a 55/1.8K
Lukasz wrote: How good a lens it is? I may have an opportunity to buy it, should I do it? What could be the fair price? Lukasz, Like the SMC 50/1.4K, the lens was made 1975-1977. The 50/1.4K apparently was somewhat different from the 50/1.4 screwmount (I assume, because everyone raves about the screwmount but few rave about the K mount). But the 55/1.8 is exactly the same as the 55/1.8 screwmount. I began to read good things about this lens on PDML recently. Here are the comments I have collected. If you decide you want one, let me know by email; I know of two more for sale: one in North America for $45, the other in Scandinavia for about $90. Also several 55/2Ks in North America for $45 and unspecified prices. And more than 10 50/1.4Ks for $75 to $150. Comments: Brendon McRae: I have seen the K 55mm f1.8 a number of times. I think they just don't cause much of a stir since the 50mm f1.4's and f1.7's are more sought after (not to mention the f1.2's). Doubt it's a dog as the SMCT 55mm f1.8 is a very sharp lens indeed. Nitin Garg wrote: I have rarely seen the k-mount version of the 55/1.8 or 55/2 on ebay or anywhere else. Is this lens a dog (comment at Stan's site seemed like it) or just produced very little ? Dave Stratton: With the hope that I won't start a flame war.I have a SMC Pentax 55/1.8.And I use it !! I have found (I make this applicable to only the lenses I have and my use) the 55/1.8 is on of the sharpest, highest contrast, lens I have. At f2 and beyond I have found that this lens really performs for me (I have a Canon 7 with a black 50/1.4 and the 55/1.8 gives equal or better performance). The 55/1.8 and a K85/1.8 are my basic kit. I have an M28.2.8 and an M50/1.4 that are both reasonably sharp, but do not have the high contrast, almost brittle bite of the 55 and 85. Maybe I just have one of the GOOD ONES I really don't know. Yoshihiko Takinami - . . . A50/1.2 is an excellent performer at f/8-11 with very high resolution and very good visual sharpness. Its visual sharpness at f/8-11 seems comparable to K55/1.8, or K55/2, at the same apertures in my own experiences. Bill Cassleberry - I have the F50mm f1.7 it is a very good lens as far as I can tell. easily as good as my 55mm Takumar lenses, if not better. Mark Gosdin: I have the 55/1.8 and 55/2 ( Both off eBay as a matter of fact. ), they are good lenses. Their rarity appears due to short production runs. According to Boz's site the 55/1.8 was produced from 1975 to 1977, the 55/2 from 1976 to 1977. They seem to have been the Basic lenses for the original K series. Especially the 55/2 as it is a deliberately Choked version of the 55/1.8, a classic mystery of Pentax marketing. I personally like the 55mm's perspective vs the 50mm. Fred: From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: k mount 55mm: I have rarely seen the k-mount version of the 55/1.8 or 55/2 on ebay or anywhere else. Is this lens a dog (comment at Stan's site seemed like it) or just produced very little ? The K 55/1.8 (and the K 55/2 is exactly the same, except for some extra baffling to cut the aperture a bit) is definitely ~not~ a dog. My experience (although this is with just one sample) is that the K 55/1.8 is not a particularly strong performer at wider apertures, but is very sharp at mid-apertures and smaller. That is, it is soft at f/1.8 to f/4, and it gets somewhat better at f/5.6, but then at f/8 and above - all of a sudden - it is tack-sharp. Fred - . . . very soft from maximum aperture until about f/8, when all-of-a-sudden it [gets] very sharp throughout the middle apertures. Todd Stanley - I have this lens, but haven't really gotten a really good feel for how it performs optically yet. It is a well built solid lens (typical of the K series). It seems to have a weaker version of that 3d effect of the limited lenses are noted for. No tests, but it's sharp, but I feel my A 50mm F1.4 is sharper, and maybe the A 50mm F2 also. One really nice thing about the lens is that it has a long throw on the focus, which makes very precise focusing a breeze. As for perspective I don't see any difference. Magnification I can tell a difference when shooting with both eyes open. It makes my Ricoh's viewfinder close to lifesize, which is why I like to use it on that body. It is also fairly easy to use on the KX in this regard, but 50mm seems more comfortable to me. On the ME the magnification is higher so a 50mm is the normal lens of choice. Lon Williamson: Wide open it's soft, stopped down it seems pretty near as good as any. The thing touted about this lens, is with the old K body viewfinders, the 55 looks exactly life-sized. Which it does, and which I could care less about. But then someone like Shel might actually find this useful for stealth photography. Kelvin Lee: I also had a K85/1.8 and the colour was somewhat more neutral, as is my older SMC Takumar 55/1.8...From Kelvin: I have a whole slew of
Re: nabbed a 55/1.8K
Fred wrote: Compared to other normal Pentax lenses, it's very soft at wide apertures. However, it has a split personality - it becomes very sharp at f/8 and smaller. Fred, Normally, softness at wide apertures would keep me from buying a lens. But the price was right, and I love the feel of the SMC K lenses, at times regretting selling my 28/2K, 105/2.8K, and 135/2.5K. I guess I'll hold on to my Rikenon 50/2 for available light shots at f/2.8 to f/5.6 and bring out the 55/1.8K for outdoor shots and flash. Any chance the 50/1.4K would yield sharp pics at the wider apertures? (I'm expecting a job offer next week, so I'm ready to revert to my shameful old ways.) Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Lens Sharpness?
We compare our photos to those in National Geographic. William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This begs the question: How many people are satisfied with their lens because they haven't seen a sharper one? How do you know if your lens is sharp enough if you haven't compared it to a known really sharp lens? Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: nabbed a 55/1.8K
OK, Fred, that would explain why the Super-Tak draws raves but not the 50/1.4K. I wasn't aware that anything changed during the Tak period other than coatings and focusng rings. Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm a little skeptical about there being any significant optical difference between the SMC K 50/1.4 and either the S-M-C Tak or SMC Tak 50/1.4's - I've found them to be essentially identical (although this is not the studied result of extensive testing). It is my impression that, in the evolution of the Pentax 50/1.4 lenses, there were/are three basic designs: 1. The first Super-Tak. 2. The second Super-Tak, the S-M-C Tak, the SMC Tak, the SMC K, and the M. 3. The A, the F, and the FA. Paul Franklin Stregevsky (who is up past midnight editing the Bat Mitzvah and school-play photos while his family cavorts in Disney World) - 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 .
Re: MZ-S w/ 24mm lenses and flash
Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone want to explain to me why it's so great that the MZ-S's flash will cover 24mm instead of 28mm if none of their 24mm lenses can be used? Chris, As I understand it, there are two causes for flash vignetting: The light doesn't disperse wide enough, and a long lens blocks the light. My guess is that with no lens attached, the built-flash will cover 28mm at a 1-stop loss and 24mm at a 2-stop loss. On the other hand, all of the lenses you've named are longish, and it's possible that a stubbier 24 or 28 will work just fine--or with only the vignetting component caused by inadequate flash coverage (1 to 2 stops). On my recent shoot of a Bat Mitzvah dance, most of my dance shots were shot with a Pentax SMC 35/2K and a powerful hotshoe flash set to 35mm coverage, the widest the unit could go without a diffuser. Well, before installing the 35 I took one shot with my Vivitar 28/1.9K and a Sto-Fen Omni Bounce diffuser (http://www.stofen.com). What a difference that Omni-Bounce made! It lit up every corner, near and far, providing the even illumination of available light with the f/5.6, 1/125 second sharpness of flash. I realize you can't use a diffuser on the built-in flash. I agree that it's deceptive to call the built-in flash coverage 24mm when only short prime lenses will work, and possibly with some vignetting. It reminds me of the ploy seen in the ratings of cheap powered loudspeakers: 30 to 18,000 Hz...with a -9 dB rolloff at the extremes. Or 200 watts per channel...at 5% distortion. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Lens Sharpness?
Bruce Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The man is a 75 year old fool, pandering to novices and a shill for the camera companies selling entry level dreck. Bruce, I don't think Keppler missed the mark in his advice on testing for lens sharpness. I think he meant, Resolution, shmezolution; see if it's sharp enough for you. He is well aware that most users--even Pop readers--don't blow up their prints past 4x6. At that size, neither the limitations of 400-speed film nor the diffraction effects of f/22 will be seen. I have saved a couple dozen Keppler columns since the 1970s. The man is a gifted writer blessed with uncommon sense and insight. Consider his heterodox advice about tripod stability: When walking around, settle for a featherweight, less-than-ideal tripod rather than none at all. No matter what facet of photography he is writing about, he sees angles that few others see. He is an iconoclast whose unconventional wisdom has upset a number of accepted beliefs. No one who has read his many critiques of the limitations of autofocus can doubt this. Nor do I agree that he is a shill for the camera companies selling entry level dreck. Keppler has written any number of columns bemoaning the absence of important features in many entry-level--and midrange--cameras. He has even written that we need truth-in-advertising laws that require camera makers to list the features that a camera doesn't have, so the bedazzled buyer won't overlook their absence. As for promoting entry-level dreck on behalf of the camera makers, can you explain how it would be in their interest to have Keppler encourage consumers to spend less, rather than more? Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re[3]: Pricing of PhotoWork
The reality is, if the buyer has decided to settle for subpar work, we have little choice but to educate him or settle for a smaller premium. I'm out of work right now. The jobs I'm looking at pay much less than I'm used to getting, in part because in many sectors, the technical writing field no longer has much to do with superior writing; it has more to do with mastery of software. I could wring my hands, or I could decide it's better to be employed at 30 percent less than to be unemployed. I'm applying to several Federal jobs at the GS-13 level. I'm going out of my way to urge them to give me an onsite test so I can prove I'm as good as I say. Whenever I'm tested against other writers, I'm able to prove I'm as good as I say and worth what I'm asking. Perhaps professional photographers could do the same: Compare their portfolio side by side against amateur shots, and show people what they're missing. I know one out-of-work tech writer who was getting $75 an hour as a contractor in Redmond, Washington, and can't bring herself to settle for half that here in the other Washington (DC), where $50 an hour is the 98th percentile for a tech-writing contractor. In Microsoftland, the cost of a manual can be amortized over millions of copies. Of course they can afford to pay a king's ransom for good writing! Here, we write manuals that will be used by only hundreds of clients. Given such a small customer base, it's much more difficult to persuade an employer to pay extra for great writing skills. When my wife and I were planning our small wedding (12 guests), we asked a professional wedding photographer how much he would charge About three thousand dollars! And no, we wouldn't get our hands on the negatives, but we could buy them three years later for $75. No thanks: We found a woman who worked in a mall studio who agreed to shoot our wedding for $200 plus costs, using 35mm gear. And after presenting us with the proofs, she was glad to let us take the negatives to a pro lab of our choice and order as many, of whatever size, as we pleased. Was she as good? Of course not. Was he worth ten times her fee? Not to this buyer. Paul Franklin Stregevsky Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - 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 .
Re: Brit Shooters Get Suspicious Treatment In New Jersey
People don't draw rational conclusions when they see a serious camera. Five examples of irrational inferences: 1. That guy photographing my city may be up to something. If the Brit were a bad guy, he would have been careful not to call attention to himself. Ergo, he would have forgone the big, conspicuous gear and taken a quick shot or two from his car window. 2. Let me see that camera, Sir. As mentioned months ago, there's no rational reason for airport security guards to peer through the viewfinder of a non-SLR. Absolutely nothing can be determined about the camera's innards. 3. Sorry I'm in your way. When I'm at a school shooting an indoor event, people duck and apologize as they walk by my tripod, even though I take pains to stand a foot or two away from it, my hand off the remote release cord, to assure them that I'm not about to snap the shutter. There's no way anyone could mistake my 1970s gear for a camcorder that's always recording. 4. His camera says Sears. He can't be serious. That would be the Sears KS Auto, otherwise known as the Ricoh XR-2s. 5. That Stregevsky fellow is standing on a stepladder to reach his camera on his tall tripod. And he's holding a release cable. And there he goes with a one-legged tripod, with its head turned sideways. And he's dressed in black. He must know what he's doing. :) Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Hood for K105/2.8
There's a Takumar 105/2.8 metal threaded hood on U.S. EBay right now, but I think the Tak used a 49mm filter. I wouldn't be surprised if you could use a 135mm or longer hood without vignetting. When I had a K105/2.8, as I recall I had the original hood and it made a handsome combination. On my Kiron 105/2.8K (52mm filter), I use a Nikon HS-8 snap-in metal hood with good results. It's 51mm long and flares out beautifully to 69mm. It was designed for the 85/2 and 105/2.5. I used to shun all nonthreaded hoods, but the Nikon snap-in mount is very simple and secure. The HS-10 is similar but offers a lever for even easier snapping in and out. The Nikon HN-8 threaded hood (52mm filter) was designed for the 105/2.8 and 135/3.5. A list of all Nikon hoods and their specs can be found at http://home.swbell.net/houshr/camera/nikon/lenshoods.html That page says the HS-8 is 30mm long, but 50 or 51mm is correct. These and other Nikon hoods are routinely available on U.S. EBay, where you can see photos. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Self Portraits?
How large (dimensions)? How large a file size? By self portrait, I assume it's a portrait OF us, but not necessarily BY us (via a timer), right? Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: cost of a head shot session?
Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Paul, how come you didn't set up your tripod and use a cable release and take one yourself? :) Ann, 1. I'm a candid shooter; I don't know how to pose me, or anyone else, for a portrait. 2. I don't have off-camera flash. 3. I don't have a blank background, unless you count a wall. 4. It would be a month before I'd complete the roll. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Filter Question:
Bob Poe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm trying to decide about filters for the K24/2.8. Will a regular size (thickness) filter vignet; or should I go the step-up ring route and say, go from 52 to 58mm for UV and Polarizer? I used a Nikon on mine, without problems. But then, I never shot wider than f/5.6. If you're concerned, your best choice would be Heliopan Slim (the multicoated version, of course), which is threaded to take a screw-in hood, or B+W Slim (multicoated), which is not. Given that 52mm offers a safety margin over the later 49mm 24s, I'll bet a Pentax filter would be just fine. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Cosina=Rikenon?
No. The Cosina 55/1.2 is the same as every other 55/1.2K EXCEPT Rikenon. The Rikenon is probably better. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: OT?! Opinions on VS1 35-85/2.8
JamesRel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this lens come in screw mount and/or K-mount? Both. If in K-mount, does it have any electrical contacts like a PK-A lens? Or is it just like an old K lens? It's just like an old K lens. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
RE: For Travel, Limiteds Limiting?
Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I would drop the 43 in favour of the 24-90. If you have 3 cameras travel with the 24-90 on one and the 70-200 on the other. That way you are always ready for all focal lengths. Rob, I hear this a lot, making me suspect that when traveling, I must be the only one who carries low-speed film in one camera and high-speed in another. If I'm outdoors, and the lens I want is on the body that I've loaded with high-speed film, I must change lenses anyway. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Rikenon 55/1.2 what where when how?
smcforme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the story with the Rikenon 55mm f1.2? Does Ricoh still make K-mount lenses? Are they sold in the US? Pricey? I can't find any information on the net. ANSWER: It was introduced sometime before 1995. It was probably discontinued by 2000. It has a P setting to work in Program mode on Ricoh XR program-capable bodies (XR-P, XR-M / XR-X, XR-3P) Good luck finding this one; it's harder to find used, or new, than the Pentax 85/1.8K, 85/1.4A, 135/1.8A, 120/2.8K, and 18/3.5K. Yoshi has written that he prefers it to any Pentax 50 or 55. Others believe that Ricoh's 50/2 (P and non-P) and 50/1.4P perform better, the 1.4P beating Contax in a major test. I suggest you be happy with one of Pentax's fine 50s or Ricoh's 50/2. I tried the Vivitar 55/1.2K and found its view no brighter than the view through a Pentax 50/1.4A. Mark Cassino or Mark Gosdin has reported that the Rikenon 55/1.2K delivers slower f/stops, aperture for aperture, than a Pentax 50/1.4A. So the speed advantage is probably nil, although focusing would still be a bit snappier because of the more limited depth of field. Three shops in Europe were advertising it a while back; I wrote to two and got no reply: Czech, 8490 units ($235) I think this is new, meaning they have several. http://members.tripod.com/I_P_F/ March 29 2002 RICOH Obj. Rikenon 55mm F1,2 8 079,- Kc at http://www.fotomorava.cz/zbozi.asp?kat=34vyr=47 21 March 2001 275/142 Euro ($125), 22JAN 01 in italy http://www.nicam.it/obiettivi.asp Anyway, here's what I have on it: 7 elements in 6 groups, 9-blade aperture, 58mm filter, 2.5 in. wide, 1.8 in. long, 11 oz. (64mm x 46 mm x 312 g) Close focus: 2 feet (1:8.9X) When using an f/1.2 with an electronic shutter, use aperture priority so you're assured of the 1.2 aperture and any matching shutter speed.The Pentax 1.2 can stop down to f/22. Stefan Zandburg: Camera Magazine tested it with the Nikon 50mm f/1.2 and claimed it was quite on par, only slightly lower in quality; at full opening, sharpness and contrast were slightly less but it had less vignetting than Nikon. Popular Photography test, July 95: Exposure at film plane is very accurate from f/2 to f/11. At f/16, slightly underexposed (0.2 stop at infinity, 0.5 at close) but still within tolerance. Underexposure at max aperture was due to light falloff. Distortion, 1.1%, barrel. Lateral color: Dominant, will affect picture quality. Full click stops on aperture ring from f/1.2 to f/16. Hands on: Beautifully assembled and finished metal-barreled lens is heavy for a normal lens but balances well on larger cameras like the XRX-3PF.aperture ring clicks into stops smartly, but is slightly slippery. In the lab, overall SQF was good, the result of lower readings at f/1.2 and f/2 but dramatically higher in the f/4 to f/16 range. Field curvature was normal; there was noticeable barrel distortion. In the field: Test slides confirmed SQF findings: Slides were soft and lacked contrast at f/1.2, improved steadily through f/4, then produced very crisp slides with very good contrast through f/16. Substantial flare at f/1.2 through f/2.8, gone by f/4, but very obvious ghost images in backlit shots at all apertures. Light falloff was gone by f/2.8. Conclusion: For the available-light enthusiast, a very attractive optic at a very good price that will produce quite acceptable results wide open up to 8x10. Very fine optic at middle to small apertures, but beware of ghost images in strong backlight. Yoshihiko Takinami, 1997: I agree that the SMC 50/1.2 is not a very good choice. But I prefer Ricoh's Riken 55mm f/1.2 to any Pentax 50mm lens. It's really a great lens, I think. I use with my Z-1 and ME Super. Yoshi, 29 Nov. 97: I use the Rikenon 55mm f/1.2 with my PZ-1 and my Ricoh XR-8 super. I believe it is one of the best value-for-the-money lenses for Pentax cameras. Its build quality is very good and just heavy. A bit soft wide open, but it is quite sharp and contrasty at one stop down, though it is sensitive for focus and light conditions. (?) I love this lens. Gregory (The Who): there are a lot of turns allowed on MF ricoh 55/1.2 lens. i mean a lot! that little minute fine turning is make history of being great or average for a critical macro focus usually. Mark Cassino, July 09, 2000: I like the 55/1.2. The Rikenon 50 and 55, Kiron 105, and A200 macro are my mainstays for normal to moderate telephoto work, and I'd highly recommend any. Yoshi's lens tests: Center resolution, 49 lpm at f/1.2 and f/2; 55 lpm at f/2.8 and f/4 and f/4; 62 lpm at f/5.6 and f/8; 55 lpm at f/11; 55 lpm at f/16. Corners: 35 lpm at f/1.2; 44 lpm at f/2; 49 lpm at 2.8 through f/5.6; 62 lpm ag f/8 and f/11; 55 lpm at f/16. Yoshi: I also tested some Ricoh K-mount lenses besides the Pentax's Here's the results. # Check aother post of mine about equipments, notes, etc. ***CENTER RESOLUTION*** Lens Type 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.8 2 2.4 2.8
Re: OT?! Opinions on VS1 35-85/2.8
Hmmm. One of my Super Programs is in the shop again for the same reason as before: I've damaged the autodiaphragm mechanism. And what lens is stuck in it and must be removed by the repair shop? The Vivitar Series 1 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Macro Zoom. Coincidence? Fred wrote: The fact that they were released before the arrival of the LX is the likely cause of an apparent mechanical incompatibility for use with the LX. While my VS1 35-85/2.8 works (like the proverbial charm) with an ME Super or a Super Program, there is a problem with mounting it on my LX's. I had to do a wee bit of filing down (after masking thoroughly the rest of the lens) of one corner or the rather long baffle (or shield) at the lower part of mount end of the lens, to prevent contact between it and the upper part of the LX's mirror box baffle when first inserting the lens into the LX's K-mount (before twisting it into place) and/or when untwisting the lens to remove it from the mount. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: For Travel, Limiteds Limiting?
Rob, It's been quite a while since I've saved someone's views into the Which focal lengths to carry question. But your comments were so insightful I've saved them in bold red. You may have even persuaded me to sell my Rikenon 28-100/4. Rob Studdert wrote: After a few days with the combo that you choose you will see the view in terms of the FL that you have available, it's a very natural and rewarding way to shoot, I find that it allows you to concentrate on what's in front of the camera rather than on the camera its self. I think the key to successfully using prime lenses is to select the kit such that the AOV that are available to you are different enough that you can make a quick and absolute decision about the best lens to use for the given view. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: OT?! Opinions on VS1 35-85/2.8
Steve Larson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wanna try that 43-86! ;) Sounds like a Pentax Limited focal length range. :) Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Limited Lenses at Photokina ...
Alexander Grigolia wrote: A number of new Limited lenses? Are you trying to tell us that Pentax may release MORE then one Limited lens at Photokina in September? Remember in 2001 when the list was abuzz with reports of a Limited 18mm? Maybe that's one of them. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Did Pentax make M42 28/f2?
Pentax never made such a fast 28 in screwmount. Your best choice would be a Vivitar Series One 28/1.9. It is regularly available in screwmount for less than $120. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: K105/2.8?
Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's good price for K105/2.8? the seller describes it as The mechanics are flawless. The aperture clicks are positive with no play. The focus is smooth but firm. Cosmetically it is AN 8, USER CONDITION, with minor signs of wear, SUCH AS SLIGHT BRASSING ON THE TIPS OF THE APERTURE RING, A HAIRLINE METAL TRACE AT BASE OF MOUNT Mishka, It goes for about $170 to $230, depending on condition. If you want it, and it's under $250, get it; you can always sell it, but you probably won't want to. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Vs: 24-90 vs. 28-105
Comments about the 24-90 are more consistently positive. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Vs: 24-90 vs. 28-105
Oops! I saw the V in Vs. and thought this was about the Vivitars, forgetting that Vivitar made a 24-70 and 28-90 but not a 24-90. I wrote: Comments about the 24-90 are more consistently positive. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: silent ME Super - diff. models
Fred wrote: I can say that I can detect a difference in sounds between different ~lenses~. This was a surprise when I first noticed it, but using a K 200/2.5 sounds different from using an A* 135/1.8, which in turn sounds different from using a K 28/2, etc. I don't know if this is due to different lens masses, different resonance effects, different maximum apertures, or? Fred, On my Ricoh XR-P (which I soon broke), my Rikenon P 50/2 sounded louder when used on the P setting. I was never sure why, but it made me realize I could be an XR-2s--with its needle readout in aperture priority--and not miss the P setting. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Pentax lenses vs. the world? (was Re: 100mm 2.8 Macro vs. 100mm 2.8 long)
Vic ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I would wager that no one could tell if the images were shot with or without Pentax lenses any more than you could tell if they were shot with a Nikon or Canon lens. Come on guys. Bokeh smokeh. Get real. I'm reminded of Shel's amusing tale about how he posted a shot or two taken with his SMC or Super-Multi-Coated 50/1.4 to the Leica user group and several members remarked how only a Leica could have produced such marvelous contrast and sharpness. There's nothing like a blind comparison to bring out the truth. That's not to say I can't distinguish gross differences, or differences in coloration. There's no getting around differences in distortion. And some lenses have more bite. Perhaps the distinction is more fair when we confine the subject to resolution and limit our statement to the following: Unless you use low-speed film and a tripod or high shutter speed, resolution is wasted. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Indoor fun with my 200, 300, and 400mm
Last night marked my first full-event shoot in the high school auditorium, where my 5th-grader's elementary school held its annual spring concert of song and dance. The theme this year was jazz. The high school's auditorium is a good deal deeper than its counterparts in the elementary and middle schools where I'm used to shooting. Hence, I added my XR Rikenon APO 300/4.5 and Pentax SMC 400/5.6 PKA to the mix. Let me just say how empowering it feels to be WAY in the back, using your 200 as a wide angle! Even with the 400, I couldn't fill the frame with a solo kid. In horizontal mode, it took in about seven kids bunched together. Normally I'd have used it in portrait mode, but I had brought along just one tripod and, since it had a ballhead, I didn't want to miss shots by switching modes. I also had my Super Program on a monopod. I went up close and got some nicely angled shots with my 50 and 135. Unfortunately, I forgot to bring along my remote shutter release. From now on, it will live in the camera bag, not in the cabinet. I'll report on the results when they're in. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: OT?! Opinions on VS1 35-85/2.8
It's not off-topic to ask about a lens that can be used on a Pentax body. List members do it all the time. I was surprised to discover that I've collected no comments on this lens. It has 12 elements in 9 groups; uses VMC multicoating; can close focus to 10.2 inches; reaches a max. magnification of 1:3.5; measures 3.2 inches (81 mm) wide by 3.6 inches (91mm) long; weighs 26+ ounces *722 g); and uses a 72mm filter. Adorama had one in March for $94 in VG condition. Steve Larson can tell you more, but Steve has never met a Series 1 lens he didn't like. Come to think of it, neither have I. :) Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Vivitar 35/1.9
$26.53 for the screwmount version? Helluva deal, Paul! I've seen only three in K mount in four years. Close focus 1.3 feet (0.4 m) 55mm filter size Made 1975 to about 1979 As you may have read on Cameraquest.com, many consider this an honorary Series 1 prime. It and the even-scarcer Soligor CD 35/2K and screwmount (58mm filter) are, to my knowledge, the only autodiaphragm 35s available in K mount from third parties (not counting Ricoh and Chinon). And they're both fast! Collected comments: Gary Schloss, Olympus archives, Sept. 97: [Like the Series 1 28/1.9,] The earlier, all-metal Vivitar 35/1.9 is also a terrific lens, but considerably longer and heavier than [the] Zuiko 35/2. And it's single-coated. I have first-hand experience with the Vivitar 24/2.8 and 35/1.9, and both are well worth keeping . Mark Gosdin of PDML (May 11, 2001): I've got one of these in M42 mount that came with a M42 - K adapter attached to it. ( Whoever put the adapter on had no intention of ever removing it, they took the locking pin off of the adapter! ) The lens is surprisingly good for a mid 70's Third Party lens. It is prone to a little flare, and benefits from a good lens hood. This lens convinced me to start working toward a SMC Pentax-M 35mm f2.0. I like 35mm for many People pictures, and a fast f- stop allows me to forgo flash when necessary. (I'm about to list this lens and a Vivitar 28mm f2.8 on eBay, gotta sell so stuff if I want to buy that SMC!) Jay Piper, October 28, 1999: I have no complaints about sharpness of used Vivitar 24/2 and 35/1.9. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: best sounding shutter?
I like the shutter sound of my Ricoh XR-2s. It's quick and snappy; no ker-chunk, just chunk. The same Copal CCS vertical-travel metal shutter was used in the Konica TC and Nikon FM. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
50/1.2A cost (was: Re: anyone knows about this lens?)
Peter's message made me realize that it wasn't the 50/1.2A I sold to Japan for $375 BIN; it was the 28/2K. I sold the 50/1.2A to a list member a couple weeks ago for either $350 or $375. He received it and reported I'm in love. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Pentax lenses vs. the world? (was Re: 100mm 2.8 Macro vs. 100mm 2.8 long)
Knut, You're right about the 35/2 FA; I had forgotten about this autofocus lens. I guess I stand corrected about the Sigma 50 macro being sharper than the Pentax 50/2.8 FA. It sharpness is nothing short of phenomenal. Yoshihiko Takinami writes: This macro is excellent not only for macro work but also for normal use. Better than Sigma EX because the SMC coating is better In my experiences, FA50/2.8 macro seems the *sharpest* with great resolving power and contrast. And David Collett of Oxford University: My top two sharpest primes (from a subjective rather than objective measurement) are the FA50/2.8 macro and my k35/3.5. My A50/1.4 is a pretty close third. In favor of the Sigma, Tanya wrote, Took the most three-dimensional-looking pictures I've ever seen. And there are also numerous superlatives, as I recall, by users at the various lens rating sites. I think Tanya's comment and others I've read left me with the impression that the Sigma was the macro to beat. Now to the 135mm contest: Pentax 135/1.8 vs. Vivitar Series 1 135/2.3. Somehow, all my collected comments on the Pentax have been erased. The comments I've collected about the Vivitar state that it's sharp at all apertures. The Pentax, as I recall, must be stopped down a bit to become truly sharp. Not surprising, since it's about two-thirds stop faster but only 5mm wider in filter size. I was drawing an inference that it can't be sharper than the Vivitar. I also agree with you that the lack of an autodiaphragm can be a big drawback. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: OT?! Opinions on VS1 35-85/2.8
I found a couple comments about this lens: Warren Kato ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), on Olympus discussion site, 10 March 1999: The Vivitar 35-85/2.8 is an amazingly contrasty lens producing sharp looking photos. It's part of my BIG kit, Series 1 35-85, 135/2.3, 200/3 and Zuiko 300/4.5. All take 72 mm filters. All focus to 1:4 or 1:5 except for the Zuiko. It beats all Zuiko 35-85 zooms (tricky answer). Suffice it to say that I have never been dissatisfied with the sharpness of any of these lens. Kato again: The early Series 1 lens, brought out in 1972 through 1974 or thereabouts, consisted of the 70-210, 35-85 Varifocal, 135/2.3, 200/3 and 28/1.9. They were innovative in several ways, including internal focusing and close focusing correction groups. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
RE: anyone knows about this lens?
HUDERER Bernd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How much did you get for the 50/1.2A and how was the state ? I sold it on EBay last week for $375 BIN to an American living in Japan. I described it, basically, as EX++, a fine specimen. He was not disappointed. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: what is this lens like Enna Munchen 24mm Pentax K Mount Lens
Oops--I forgot you're looking at a 24. I was still thinking of the 35/3.5K thread from this morning. I wrote: If you're going to settle for a quasi K mount, get an M42 Carl Zeiss Jena 35/2.4 Auto (49mm filter), arguably the finest 35 ever made. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: 100mm 2.8 Macro vs. 100mm 2.8
Mishka wrote: According to photodo.com the MTF ratings are Grade: 4.6 35mm/MF Tokina AT-X 90/2,5 macro Grade: 3.9 35mm/AF Pentax SMC-FA Makro 100/2,8 Grade: 4.3 35mm/AF Pentax SMC-F 100/2,8 macro Grade: 4 35mm/MF Vivitar 105/2,5 Macro Series 1 so, yes, pentax has a lens that is a tad better than Vivitar. and still behind Tokina. Actually, the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 is the same as the Vivitar 90/2.5 Macro (1:2). That Vivitar, as has been stated here before, boasted the highest resolution score in Popular Photography's tests for many years. I agree with Mishka entirely on this one. I have several quotes from Nikon users who say the Vivitar/Kiron 105 macro is as sharp as the Nikon; one sold his Nikon, seeing no point in keeping it. In a blind comparison, I doubt the Pentax would consistently be picked over the third-party macros as the winner. But then, I sold my SMC 28/2K and kept my Vivitar 28/1.9; sold my Pentax 50/1.4A and 50/1.2A and kept my Rikenon 50/2. For a photographer like me, who shoots primarily at ISO 400 and higher, ultimate sharpness isn't everything; I'll take sharp enough + great color (Vivitar 28/1.9) or fidelity (Rikenon, which happens to be sharper than the Pentaxes from f/2 to f/4.5). Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
FS: B+W 010 MC filter, $14
I just sold off the last of my lenses that used 49mm filters, and I still have one of these top-of-the-line BH multicoated UVs for sale, in great condition with clean glass. $14 + $3 shipping to US, or $5 to Canada. This is half the BH new price. Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - 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 .
Re: Vivitar Series 1 28/1.9 Lens Focusing
I just checked my 28/1.9K and confirmed what Shel reported: the change in focusing effort is normal. I think Steve Larson called it a clutch. Perhaps it is related to the floating elements, even though, as you point out, no such two-stage effort is found in the floating-element 28/2K. If you're interested, I have an Adorama-brand black metal circular threaded 58mm wide-angle hood that I bought for this lens. It measures 93mm (3.7 inches) in diameter by 22mm (0.8 in.) deep. $8 shipped. (I now have an original Vivitar hood.) Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
200/2.5K deal at Adorama
$365 in EX--a very nice deal. Also a 30/2.8K for $285--not the best price, but if you want it... Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: color correcting digitally?
I think this is what I've been looking for (AutoEye 2.0): http://www.autofx.com/detail_pages/aedetail.html If you scroll to the bottom, you'll find downloadable demos for Mac and Windows. The software can be used as a standalone program or as a Photoshop plug-in. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: color correcting digitally?
I wrote: http://www.autofx.com/detail_pages/aedetail.html If you scroll to the bottom, you'll find downloadable demos for Mac and Windows. To download the demo, you must join the site. I just read the Terms of Use policy; Auto FX Software will sell your email address to its business associates and you must agree to get their special offers. Who knows if those associates will, in turn, sell your email address to other special offerers. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
AutoEye 2.0 review
MacUser UK reviews AutoEye 2.0 at http://www.macuser.co.uk/golive/front_flash.php Click the Search button, then type AutoEye in the Product Name field. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Digital advantage (was: Re: OT: Read this before you spend all your $$$....)
Tonghang Zhou wrote: I see the real advantage of digital camera being the instant-feedback and shoot as many as you want to experiment capability. You can't do this with film. An acquaintance once mentioned this: with his new digital camera, he shoots a lot of pictures, way more than he otherwise would. What more need one say? Unquestionably, the freeness of digital exposures (after the initial investment) is a valuable advantage. However, I'm coming to believe that digital offers an even more compelling advantage to those who shoot indoors without flash: white-balance setting with no exposure penalty. My school-play and Bat Mitvah prints from Ace Photo are perfectly color-corrected. But not the JPEGs that came on the Picture CD. Now I must spend hours per roll correcting the yellowish color in PhotoImpact. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: My reasons for wanting digital (was: Re: OT: Read this before you spend all your $$$....)
Cotty, I thoroughly enjoyed your insights into the value of digital for photographers who lack the time to spend scanning et al. I related to it because I spend too much time color-correcting my tungsten-cast shots. But if digital is so convenient, why, then, am I nearly always the only photographer to record school events? Last week was eighth-grade awards ceremony. I took shots of my daughter, her friends, and kids who received certain special awards. I handed out my business card, instructing the parents or kids to email me in a month for the JPEGs. If digital is so convenient, why do the digital owners leave their cameras at home on such important occasions? One theory: Many digital interfaces are difficult to navigate. Every try turning off the autoflash on a Nikon CoolPix 950 or similar? Good luck finding the off setting, buried two or three layers deep in the arcane mode settings. I suspect that many owners never master the controls and realize they won't be able to use their camera sans flash on solemn occasions. And even if they could shut off the flash, the results would stink, since they don't own a tripod. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
color correcting digitally?
Which software is the fastest for changing a tungsten-yellow image into one with natural color? Is any software smart enough to do it with one click? Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: color correcting digitally?
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Try this: http://www.komkon.org/~wrobb/filtersim.zip OK, I've installed the program. What filter should I apply to get the tungsten yellow out? Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Theater shots back, not pushed, and...
As Aaron suggested, I had my Fuji NPZ 800 and Superia Xtra shots of the middle school play (The Hobbit) processed unpushed, even though I shot at 2/3 stop under. I must differ with Aaron about the advisability of not pushing when you've knowingly underexposed. The shots are certainly acceptable, but there's a definite lack of blackness in black areas that is disappointing to me and my wife. This is seen across the board, from shots exposed in my KX, my Ricoh XR-2s, my Super Program, and my Yashica rangefinder. I've shot five or six school plays under these conditions, and this is the first time the underexposure is this visible--minor, but visible. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
FS: Magnifier K, $25
This is not the flip down Magnifier M that I sold earlier this week; it's the K version, to fit eyepieces of K-series and SpotMatic bodies. Includes diopter adjustment collar and leather zip case. PayPal, BidPay, bank check, money order, or (US only) personal check. Add $3 for shipping within USA, $5 Canada, $7 everywhere else. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: screwed 35mm F2
J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The one to get is the first [(35mm F2 Super-Tak with 67mm filter)], an outstanding if slightly large optic without ANY yellowing problem. It handles very nicely and build quality is second to none. Don't worry about not having SMC, the contrast and saturation are still excellent. JCO, Did you win the hard-to-find SMC 67mm metal screw-in hood you were bidding on for it? The Vivitar 35/1.9 (58mm filter) is also said to be excellent, almost on a par with the Series 1 28/1.9. I've seen only one in K mount but it's easier to find in screwmount. Soligor made a 35/2 (58mm) in its pro-line CD series, but I don't know how it rated. Best of the bunch may be the Carl Zeiss Jena 35/2.4. All three use the auto setting. I have photos if anyone is interested. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: FS: Pentax flip-down Magnifier M, $25: Yours
Mishka, I may have gotten confused by using a different computer to download my mail. It's yours. Send me your mailing address and I'll get it out today. Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 20:53:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Mishka Subject: Paul: I tried to contact you off list, but it seems it didn't get through. I am interested in this, let me know if it is still available. Best, Mishka Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - 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 .
FS: Pentax 50/1.4 PKA, $95
There's a slight rough (high-friction) spot in the focusing ring, which is why I'm charging just $95--some $45 below the KEH price for a specimen rated EX+. Otherwise the lens is in fine shape (EX+ or better), optically and mechanically. The P setting works. I simply prefer my Rikenon P 50/2 at f/2.8 and f/4, where I tend to use a 50. Includes an original Asahi Pentax rear cap, but no front cap. PayPal, BidPay, bank check, money order, or (USA only) personal check. Insured shipping $6 within US, $12 to Canada. Insured shipping elsewhere $14. Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - 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 .
FS: Pentax Refconverter A, $150
It's missing the rubber eyepiece and case; otherwise it's in great shape. You can fit it with a Pentax 6x7 eyepiece. (The 645 eyepiece fitting isn't wide enough.) Retains the left-right orientation while offering a 2X/1X switch. Clear view, excellent for macro work. $150. PayPal (cash/credit), BidPay, bank check, money order, or (USA only) personal check. Insured shipping $7 within US, $13 to Canada. Insured shipping elsewhere $16. Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - 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 .
Re: Best Screw Lenses?
Steve, Pentax screwmount lenses are so good--and so affordable--that I wouldn't consider third-party lenses except where there are conspicuous gaps: Fujica 400/4 and 600/5.6 in M42, for example, a fast multicoated 20 like the Carl Zeiss Jena 20/2.8, a fast portrait lens like the Carl Zeiss Jena 80/1.8, or a fast 200 like the Vivitar Series 1 200/3. All of these have an autodiaphragm switch that will work with your F. Most Series 1 lenses were not multicoated until the K-mount versions, but the Vivitar Series 1 28/1.9 screwmount is an especially nice lens that is multicoated and yields beautiful color and sharpness. How good is it? I kept my 28/1.9K and just sold my Pentax SMC 28/2K, the Pentax twin of the Zeiss Distagon. Consider the Pentax SMC 105/2.8. You could look months finding one in K mount; it's yours for the taking at $125 or less in screwmount. Many believe that the Super Takumar 50/1.4 and SMC 50/1.4 set a benchmark for build quality and sharpness that has today's 50s still playing catch-up. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
used filters for sale
Heliopan 46mm Slim UV 010 multicoated, $15 (BH sells the single-coated for $20) B+W 49mm UV 010 multicoated, $14 (BH price: $27.50) B+W 58mm UV 010 multicoated, $17 (BH $34.25) Heliopan Slim 58mm UV 010 multicoated, $30 Hoya 72mm HMC skylight 1B multicoated, $16 (BH $33) Promaster circular polarizer filter, used once, $24 (cost $47 new) (Filter factor 3-4; exposure factor 1.5 to 2 stops) PayPal, BidPay, money order, personal check. Add $3 per order for shipping. Paul Franklin Stregevsky Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - 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 .
Re: Big announcement coming up
Since someone hinted that it's a tele longer than the 77mm, I'd like to see a reincarnated SMC 135/1.8 PKA*. Just think how that might depress the price of the original! But the new one should offer close focus, like the 135/2.8 F and FA's 0.7 m. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: third-party flash problem on Super Program
Bob S ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Paul, When the flash symbol doesn't appear, I usually have caused the AF280 or AF200 to slide off the contact pins on the hot shoe. Probably not your case..? A logical hypothesis, Bob, but in my case the camera had stopped flashing even when I would press the test button and the flash was off the camera. Anyway, I just returned from Ace Camera, where Mo traced the problem to dirty contacts in the battery chamber itself. He cleaned the contacts, and the flash now works. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Adorama?
Adorama has never let me down. Twice after I ordered something by Web, it arrived the next day! I just wish they included more photos of the products they list. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Wide angle zoom 19(20)-35 recommendations
Pat wrote: So, until I will the lottery, I may not see the FA 20-35 f/4 (unless someone has one to sell?) ;-) So, in the mean time, still looking at third party options. Consider these options: 1. Tokina AF235 II HLD, 20-35mm, f/3.5 to 4.5, autofocus, 77mm filter, 82mm wide, 75mm long, 500 g, HLD glass, 13 elements in 11 groups, close focus 0.4 m (1.3 ft). Comments: The best cost/performance ratio, super wide angle with HLD glass (Tokina). Retains the optical performance of the original AF 235 design. Has an amazingly flat field. This is not an ATX model; hence it sells for much less, about $200 used at KEH. Tested in Popular Photography May 1992. In an average of 5photo magazines, it rated 2.88 (avg.) on a scale of 1 to 5. The Tokina ATX 235 AX PRO is a 20-35 constant f/2.8 that costs considerably more (upward of $500 new) and thus is probably out of your range. --- Martin Jiang, September 13, 1999; 04:41 P.M. Eastern I would recommend the Tokina 20-35 f3.5-4.5. I have been using it for over 2 years and it's an excellent lens for a little over 200. -- Dhrubo Gupta, September 14, 1999; 02:24 A.M. Eastern: I second Martin's recommendation - I picked up the Tokina 20-35/3.5 in preference to their faster ATX 2.8 zoom after checking Photodo for the MTFs. I have just returned from a trip to the Himalayas in North Kashmir with 25 rolls of Sensia and Velvia. I mostly shot at f8 and some at f22 - all were sharp but a few had a bit of softening in the corners - but excellent overall the price notwithstanding. 2. Sigma 21-35, f/3.5 to 4.2 AF, a one-touch zoom with a nonrotating front barrel. Reviewed August 1986 in Popular Photography, and again in Feb. 92. From 1986 review: Slight barrel distortion; no vignetting beyond f/8. Centering: Perfect. From [1992?] Popular Photography review: The lens is well adjusted for parfocalizationthe maintenance of focus setting throughout the zoom action. At all focal lengths, contrast is above avg. at center and 1/3 out; high-medium at 2/3 out and far edge. Supruet Thavornyutikarn, Dec. 95: A lot of people I know own this lens. Optically, this lens performs very best (second to Tamron 20-40). In practice, this lens is very difficult to use with a filter as its flower hood is very large and obstructs the front end of the lens. So using a polarizer is not convenient. Moreover, the ZEN finish comes off. But maybe this problem has bee fixed. 3. Tamron 20-40 f/2.7 to f/3.5, manual focus. Two-touch. 18 inches continuous close focus. 77mm filter. 19 oz. detachable lens shade. I get the feeling that this came in a fixed mount, for my notes say it's not available for Pentax AF or Pentax manual focus. In any event, it sold new for (sells for?) the same as the Pentax. In any event, in an average of 5photo magazines, it rated 2.74 (below avg.) on a scale of 1 to 5. 4. I think you're familiar with the Vivitar/Phoenix 19-35 f/3.5 to 4.5 autofocus zoom, which sells new for well under $150. I have many comments on this lens; the consensus is that it's well worth the money, but don't expect miracles. My own suggestion: Get a Zenitar 47K 20/2.5, a true K-mount lens, for about $100. Then get a good manual focus zoom for $200 to $250: a 24-35/3.5 Pentax (a PDML favorite), 24-40/2.8 Ricoh (nearly impossible to find), a 24-40/2.8 Tokina ATX-A, 24-45/3.5 Soligor CD, or 24-48/3.8 Vivitar Series 1. But if you need' just one lens to comprise your wide end, stick with a true superwide zoom. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
third-party flash problem on Super Program
I just returned from shooting a bat mitzvah ceremony and dance. I was able to put into practice some lessons learned from last week's shoot of a school play. The dance was in a dim hotel ballroom, and I used a Super program filled with Portra NC 400 color print film and fitted with my tilt/swivel flash unit, a Quantaray QTB 9500A with a Pentax module. This is, or was, Ritz's top-of-the-line TTL unit for manual-focus SLRs. About three-quarters through the dance, the flash symbol stopped appearing in the Super Program's window, and despite all my tinkering I couldn't get the camera to recognize the flash. I've had problems like this before with this flash. For what it's worth, I couldn't get the flash to even fire when off-camera, either. I tried spare batteries and a spare module. Nothing seems to work now. Maybe I didn't note carefully the AA orientation; it appeared that all four cells should go with the positive button upward. When the flash symbol doesn't appear in the Super Program, what is usually the cause--low battery voltage? A bad contact in the module? A poor fit to the camera? Another problem: I know I set the flash's ISO to 400. But when I packed everything up, the ISO dial was set to 800. Could this be because I briefly used a slip-on polyethylene diffuser? Could the diffuser have tugged the ISO button to a different setting when I wiggled it on or off? I plan to follow the recent advice not to push-process. But I took a good 45 shots after the diffuser came off, and just hope they don't end up underexposed. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Super Program lens coupling: I've ruined another
I went out Friday to shoot a street sign of the middle school play with my Super Program and Vivitar Series One 90-180 macro with Portra 160. The shutter speed read 4 seconds, no matter what aperture I chose. Having seen this problem before, I knew at once what had happened: I had inserted the lens carelessly, mangling the autodiaphragm coupling (or something like that). The weekend before, I had hurriedly inserted the Vivitar so that my daughter could take a close-up of a small frog. The first time the coupling broke, I had been careless in removing a Pentax M42 adapter ring. But I didn't suspect I had to exercise care when installing a K-mount lens. Sure enough, I can't remove the lens. It wiggles but won't come out. Someone at the store will be able to remove it. I have two Super Programs, and I hope this is the one for which I bought a 4-year warranty. But I feel awful asking the store to fix it a second time when it was almost certainly my fault. I'll tell them the truth; the warranty covers carelessness. Now that I think of it, Pentax lenses seem to go in and out more easily than third-party and Ricoh lenses. I dunno; I think that on other brands the coupling sticks out farther. During Thursday night's shoot of the school play, I was swapping lenses from behind the tripod-mounted cameras (KX and Sears) and having a hard time of inserting the lenses. From now on, I'll stand in front of the body when inserting a lens. By the way, I shot the sign at the mechanical speed of 1/125 second at f/16. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Report from my shoot of the school play
Overall the shoot went well, but it was not without difficulties. A summary of my lessons learned: 1. Get a remote shutter release for every body you'll use on a tripod. Man, it was great to be able to quickly jam down the release during the pyrotechnic special effect without worrying about camera shake. I still was too late three out of four times. 2. It pays to take notes during the rehearsal; I always knew when to shoot, with which lens. 3. Make do with whichever lens is on the body. Several times, I twisted off the 200 to replace it with the 100, and vice versa. Each time that I began using the original lens again, I got a l-o-n-g exposure. The reason: In twisting off the lens, I had turned the aperture ring to about f/22. Even if I could remember to glance at the aperture window of my Pentax KX or Sears KS Auto, the view was too dark to see my mistake. 4. For the behind the scenes shots of fast-moving kids, don't even try to use a rangefinder camera. Focusing (for me) is just too slow. It's embarrassing to have to tell the kids, Hold on a second, I'm still focusing. 5. Use a ballhead or 3-way --not a 2-way panhead--if you want to switch between horizontals and verticals. I had a ballhead on my Cullmann tripod but a 2-way video head on my Bogen 3001, where I had mounted the 200mm. I feel that the 200 was wasted because I couldn't turn it vertical to crop better and take in the actors' full body height. 6. Shooting from the audience wings does yield more-dramatic angles. But depth of field becomes an issue, because the actors are at vastly different distances. 7. Great shots can be taken before the show: The pep talk, applying makeup, touching up the costumes, actors studying lines or lounging. Ditto for backstage during intermission. 8. Great shots can be taken after the show: Actors hugging each other and being hugged by family members. 9. If you use a manual-exposure body, choose your aperture and stay there, or you'll probably forget to adjust the shutter speed. 10. Use a tall tripod and stand on a ladder to keep the audience's heads out of the picture. 11. The monopod with a fast-action pistol grip is great for moving around to get close stage shots and audience shots. My Cullmann Titan monopod has just two sections, and is extended by gravity when you release a pull-up lever. This made for quick height adjustments. 12. Wearing black does not always attract babes. At least I looked like a ninja. Paul Franklin Stregevsky Paul Franklin Stregevsky 13 Selby Court Poolesville, Maryland 20837-2410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] H (301) 349-5243 - 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 .
FS: SMC Pentax 50/1.2 PKA, $375
S/N 1400412. Glass is immaculate, barrel is free of mars, nicks, and wear. Pentax caps. EX++ or better. $375. Will ship anywhere, but insurance will be a problem if shipped outside North America. Shipping by U.S. Postal Service Priority: $10 U.S., $20 Canada, including insurance and delivery confirmation. PayPal, BidPay, C2IT (https://www.c2it.com/C2IT/Login), money order. If you want this but can't scrape up the money now, I'll take $200 on sendout, the rest within 30 days. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
RE: SMC 85mm (1.4/1.8 or 2.0)
There were multiple 85/1.8Ks and 85Ms for sale at http://www.kevincamera.com in the USA. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
FS: SMC Pentax 28/2K, $325
S/N 5105808. Glass is immaculate, barrel is free of mars, nicks, and wear. Pentax caps. A fine specimen of a rare, outstanding lens. $325. Will ship anywhere, but insurance will be a problem if shipped outside North America. Shipping by U.S. Postal Service Priority: $9 U.S., $19 Canada, including insurance and delivery confirmation. PayPal, BidPay, C2IT (https://www.c2it.com/C2IT/Login), money order. If you want this but can't scrape up the money now, I'll take $180 on sendout, the rest within 30 days. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: lens strategies for school play?
Mishka wrote: Paul, What I realized I had sorely missed was a color conversion filter, something like 80A. It was still sorta OK since I scanned the pictures afterwards and had a chance to fiddle quite a bit in Photoshop, but still, I really wish I had either the filter or tungsten film. Of course, I am assuming you are shooting color, right? Mishka, I shoot only daylight-balanced color print film, and I neither own nor use color correcting filters. Ace Photo in Sterling, VA does an outstanding job at color correcting; Forget filters; leave the color correcting to me, advises Mo.) I need the speed (ISO 1600) of daylight-balanced film. In any event, theater lighting is such an odd and unpredictable mixture, I'm not sure that tungsten film would be in my interest. For a classroom setting, it could...though I more commonly see fluorescent lighting. I like to tweak the digital scan in PhotoImpact anyway, cropping, enhancing or reducing contrast, and perhaps sharpening just a tad. In my digital touchups, I used to reduce saturation by 30 percent or more in an effort to make the people and their costumes look natural. But I'm coming to realize that recipients like their images a bit on the warm side; it reminds them of the theater milieu. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Hood advice for M35/2
Nikon HN-3 threaded metal circular hood with 49-52mm step-up ring. The HN-3 is on EBay all the time, cheap. It was designed for the 35/2 and 43-85 zoom. The similar HN-2 (52mm filter) was designed for the 28/2 and 35/2. So it's a bit less shallow. Check the photos on EBay and see which you prefer. or HAMA rectangular plastic clamp-on wide-angle hood with rectangular snap-in cap, though it may be too shallow to provide much glare protection; I've used it on my 24, 28, and M35/2. You can see a photo at BH photo. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Hood advice for M35/2
Bill D. Casselberry wrote:... one of the old Takumar rectangular metal hoods from the 35mm or even the 28mm would be peachy. I'd have to agree. It's way cool--you thread on the circular portion, then rotate the rectangular portion into position. If you don't insist on covering your hood with a lens cap, the Takumar may be the most sensible choice. It shows up on U.S. EBay regularly and almost certainly on dealer sites. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
$50 to ship a filter and hood across the border?
Inter Pro Photo at http://www.interprophoto.com is a Canadian site in Vancouver, BC. Their site offers the Contax No. 5 metal hood for $27 USD (vs. $45 a BH). I wanted to know if they also sold the Contax 77-to-86mm step-up ring, which normally sells for $26. I'd need it to adapt the hood to my SMC 400/5.6 PKA. The owner, Robert Liem, wrote back, Sorry, the shipping charge would cost more than the items itself. Huh? PS: I've just noticed the site's revision date: January 1997. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Program A, problem with aperture read mechanism
I ruined my Super Program (Super A)'s aperture mechanism by removing an M42 adapter in a careless way. Fortunately, I had bought the camera with an extended warrantee, and it was repaired. The salesman advised me not to put an M42 adapter on again unless I intended to keep it on the camera. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Advice Needed For Student
Funny you should mention it, Ed. I'm in the process of parting with several lenses, and I've decided that it makes more senses to give away some that to sell them. I'm giving my Pentax 50/1.4 PKA to my 24-year-old stepdaughter, with a Super Program attached. I'm happy with my Rikenon P 50/2. The 50/1.4 would be devalued anyway, because it has a rough spot in the focusing ring from when a lightweight tripod tipped over with the camera mounted, landing on (and bending) the lens's metal hood. I'm giving my Zenitar 20/2.5 to the 17-year-old daughter of my 14-year-old's middle-school art teacher. The girl has been enjoying her dad's MX and is seriously interested in photojournalism. I lent her some lenses once with the intent of mentoring her, but she didn't want to burden me by borrowing more lenses. Given that I'd get just about $60 if I sold the Zenitar, I'd rather it go to a student. I almost decided to give her my Kiron 105/2.8 1:1 macro, since Steve Larson has talked me into keeping my Vivitar Series One 90-180 1:2 zoom. I could find another Kiron, but I'd probably go years before finding another 90-180. But I could get $130 or more if I sold it, and anyway giving up the Kiron would leave a hole in my lineup between 50 and 135. It's not a gaping hole, but there are times, as when shooting a wedding, that I want to capture, say, the bride and groom and clergyman and no one else, or three bridesmaids, or a couple and their child in the audience, and from where I'm set up the 135 would be too tight. You didn't say what your budget is, but if you can spare $100, get her something that would expand her creative possibilities. That means a 90-class macro or a wide-angle of 24mm or wider. It will be a challenge to find either at that price, but if you stalk EBay it can be done--going third-party, of course. If you decide on a 28, I suggest the Vivitar 28/2 Close Focus (55mm filter), a sleeper that is said to approach the Series One 28/1.9 in optical quality. Make sure the lens says Close Focus; I can send you .jpgs so you know what to look for. If you go for a 24, the Sigma 24/2.8 is probably your best bet. Anything wider in that price range is a screwmount except one: If you can spare $120, you might consider a Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Advice Needed For Student
Since several list members are steering you toward a 135, in that focal length I recommend a Vivitar Close Focus: 17 ounces, 3.5 inches long, 62mm filter), will shoot 1:2 at 20 inches. Very solid, built in the 70s. Another good candidate: Sears Macro. Tom Wannenburg wrote: It is quite good for the price. My focus ring wobbles a little but it is otherwise solid. As a macro it is so - so, you need to stop down. It is quite sharp and very nice for portraits in the non - - macro range even wide open. One thing, you cannot use it on a ZX5n, or probably any of the new autofocus bodies: There is a screw that gets stuck in the AF drive hole. It works great on my Program Plus though. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: A*85/1.4 - one for $1,100+, one for $438
Heiko (from Germany) wrote: Bullshit! See Bojidar's explanation for the facts. Nice sprachgefuehl,* Heiko! (or is it shprachgefuehl?) *a feel for the idiomatically correct Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: lenshoods for A*85 f/1.4 (was: Re: A certain eBay item...)
I haven't been following this thread, but if anyone wants or needs an MH-RA67 metal screw-in hood--the hood designed for the 85/1.4 PKA--several have appeared on EBay recently and have gone for $25 to $30 (except for the one I BIN'd at $40). One has remained unsold after several attempts, even with starting bids at $20. Also, BH has a used one for, I think, about $28. It is sometimes listed under Pentax medium format, because it also was designed for the 120/4 MF lens. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Intervalometer
Also the Ricoh XR-P has a cool intervalometer built-in; you must use an accessory winder to take advantage of it, but even without a winder it serves as a convenient vertical release when you set it to 0 seconds. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - - - 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 .
Rexatar 300/4?
Anyone know about this lens? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1350615901 Who made it? Is it sold by another name? I thought I knew all the 300/4s by now. This one doesn't have a tripod ring. But it's sure beautiful. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Pentax Program Plus
I thought the whole idea of NAFTA--the North American Free Trading Zone--was to do away with nonsense like tariffs for any commerce between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. What gives? Are used goods still liable? Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
RE: Rexatar 300/4?
The seller tells me the following: Closest focusing is 4 meters. The filter size is 77. It is Multicoated. It does say MC. I wrote: Anyone know about this lens? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1350615901 Who made it? Is it sold by another name? Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
truth in focal length specs (was: Re: f:22, K18/3.5 warmth, 20mm bee's nest...)
I'd agree that the error is no big deal, if tolerance really meant plus or minus. It doesn't. When was the last time you read a test report that found that a lens gave you more of what you thought you paid for? A 20 mm that measured at 19.4 mm? A 200 mm that gave you 205 mm? An f/2 that was f/1.9? When all the error falls on the cheaper to make side, that's called cheating. When Amateur Photographer reviewed a 300mm lens several years ago, it found the focal length to be 280mm. But the editors added that just about all 300s were really 280s, and that Leitz was the only maker to label theirs honestly (Leica 280 mm). Bob Harris wrote: I believe I read in one of the reviews that the industry standard was to be within 5% of the rated focal length. So a claimed 20mm lens could be anywhere between 19 and 21. No big deal. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
sniping (was: Re: I WON!!! at Ebay)
William Robb wrote: Does anyone ever snipe when there's no bids on an item?? g Absolutely! Someone on the list recently published a URL to a study confirming that once a first bid has been placed, an item will draw more bidders. I've found this to be true, and for this reason often lurk until the final moments. As a seller, I haven't been very savvy, setting a wide difference between my starting price and my BIN price. The wide disparity has only encouraged buyers to avoid the BIN. Last week I was shopping for an MH-RA67 metal hood, the hood used on the 85/1.4 PKA and the 135/4 Macro in the Pentax 67 (or is it 645)? It sells for $54 at BH. There were three on EBay; two had BINs at $40. Bidding on all three began at $15 or $20. One auction would end on the 26th, the second on the 27th, the third on the 29th. A history search showed that the hood tends to linger unsold at $30 and $25. I thought about bidding $40 without BINning, hoping to get it for 40 or less. But one BIN had disappeared, and bidding on another was up to $26.50. I didn't want to spend the workday ahead worried whether I'd get one for less than the $40 I might have had. So the day before it closed, I nabbed it for $40. There was also a convenience factor: Among the three, it alone let me pay online for free. (I could pay online via BidPay for one of the others, but there's a $5 charge.) And shipping was just $4, versus $6 for the other two. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: K, A, M macro lenses...
William Robb wrote: In general, the K lenses are mechanically smoother than A lenses, and optically better than M lenses. Yep. Someone--Shel?--reported last year that many M lenses replaced the K's brass with aluminum, affecting smoothness of focus, especially in cold weather. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
Jonathan, There are other 17 and 18mm choices out there: 1. Ricoh made an XR Rikenon 18/2.8. A couple months ago one was on German EBay. It sold March 10 to a European PDMLer for just 156 Euros (about $120). It resembles the Pentax 18/3.5 but uses a 67mm filter (vs. 58). I have a photo of it; it looks like a serious lens. But almost impossible to find; the German one was one of two I've seen. 0.25m close focus, 348 g, 76mm wide, 71mm long; 11 elements in 9 groups, multicoated. 2. Since 18mm is something of a specialty lens, you may decide you don't need the K mount. If so, you might consider the Pentax SMC 17/4, or the highly regarded Sigma XQ 18/3.5 in screwmount with a YS adapter. It was also sold by Ritz as the Quantary Tech-10. 72mm filter size. I have a photo or two of the Sigma, if you're interested. It sells for $175 to $275 when you find it online. I'm reasonably sure this was different from the Sigma that was rebadged as the Spiratone, Vivitar, and Tokina. 3. Before introducing the ATX 17/3.5 PRO in AF, Tokina sold the ATX 17-AF, the same optics but not as well built. Unlike the PRO, it was offered in K mount! And even if the focal length was fudged 1mm, you're still in the 18mm ballpark. Collected comments: Average Overall Rating: 4.33 out of 5 stars with 3 review(s) Submitted by Arnon Hubara , Date Reviewed: 1/14/01 12:10:37 AM Professional photographer from Helsinki Finland. With 11-20 years experience in Outdoor photography. Price Paid: $350 Purchased At: helsinki Strengths: The lens I own produces excellent images. Sharpness and contrast is very high thanks to the aspherical element. Weaknesses: The lens I own is AT-X non pro, it's mechanism is very weak and causes a lot of problems. Other Products Used: Pentax-A 15mm 3.5 Nikon 20mm 2.8 Customer Service: It was repaired once by Tokina's representative, good service. Twice by an independent, excellent service! Review Summary: Boasts excellent optical quality specialty comparing to it's very low price. Produces far better images than the much more expensive Pentax that I had before. However due to mechanical problems I intend to exchange it with the Pro model which is optically identical. The rating I submit is only for the non pro lens. 4 stars value, 4 stars overall. Submitted by Alberto Baffa , Date Reviewed: 4/29/00 4:56:16 PM Intermediate photographer from Lecce, Italy . With 6-10 years experience in Outdoor photography. Strengths: Very good construction quality and - surprise! - good (never said) resistance to ghost and flares! Weaknesses: on the plastic mount of a Minolta HTsi it sometimes fail in monitoring shutter opening (just a stupid problem); you have to be used with a bit of distortion (but it's a 17...) Other Products Used: no one so wide Review Summary: I falled in love with super wide angles shoot, and decided to got this Tokina for the 17 vs price; I took my first three rolls from the lab two days ago (superia100, ultra100 and Ekta100vs): no vignetting with polarizer and, believe me, I am very very happy. TIP!: choose this or another prime super wide, and not a zoom like 17-35 or similar: very close focus is ESSENTIAL (imho) to got smart pictures with this focal length. 5 stars value, 4 stars overall. As reviewed by Ken Welsh , Date Reviewed: 4/21/00 1:36:48 PM Professional photographer from Dublin, County Dublin Eire. With 21+ years experience in photography. (Note: This review is apparently for the PRO version) Strengths: Exceptionally well built. My sample offers extremely sharp optics. Have duped some shots up to 6x9cm Weaknesses: I'm happy. Other Products Used: 20mm Nikon f4 and 20mm Nikon AF f2.8 Customer Service: No problems, so far (3 years) Review Summary: My sample is a bargain alternative to much more expensive marquee optics. I have two other ATX Tokina lenses which are also excellent: the 28-70mm f2.6-F2.8 and the 100-300mm f4. The only bad luck I have had with Tokina ATX lenses is with the f2.8 20-35mm. My tests - on a tripod - showed the edges to be soft. I sold it. 5 stars value, 5 stars overall. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: The Digital Look vs. The Film Look
Ken Waller wrote: I'm not sure what the distinctive look is that you are referring to Albano, but I do notice most posted images, that were taken by a digital camera, exhibit great depth of field. Yes, they do, thanks to the small area of their imaging chip--a virtue that will not be shared by the 36x24mm chip that many of us our holding our breath for. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re: Guess what I found...
Fred wrote: But, here we've leveled the playing field - now those who never spend time searching for Pentax bargains will have the exact same chance as those PDML-ers who invest a lot of their time trying to glean Pentax gold out of the eBay rubble. Indeed, PDMLers will recall a similar thread a few months ago that persuaded me to stop announcing such EBay finds. So let me say it once: Folks, if you want to find a hidden gem, look for it in the wrong category. When searching for a term--such as PKA or Pentax macro--search at the top level (Photo). Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Re[2]: I WON!!! at Ebay
Mint-condition rare items like this 100/2.8 PKA macro bring out deep-pocketed Japanese collector/snipers. Look for a winning bid of $600 to $750, which is frankly a fair price to find it retail, if you're so lucky. Yeah, probably for around $300. No, I think it will go for more than that... Fred Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
