Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On 1/7/2016 1:31 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Bill wrote: On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. I played with the 90mm somewhat before it was actually released to the public. It's an excellent lens, and if you like the FOV it's a very good lens. I don't, I've always found the 135mm (equivalent in this case) to be too short to be a telephoto and too long to be much good for anything else. I don't see how people can say "this FOV is not much use". There are so many things that go into choosing the focal length: distance from subject, size of subject, how much of the background you want to include or exclude, how far away you can get, how close you can get, and even desired depth of field. I could see saying that you only use certain focal lengths for a particular type of photo in a particular setting. If you only shoot portraits in one studio, then I could see having one lens for face shots, one for standing portraits, one for group portraits. I could see someone saying that they never need a fisheye, or a telephoto over 1,300mm, but to pick one focal length or field of view that is well in the range of the widest and longest in your toolkit and say "this FOV isn't much use", rather than "I already have this FOV and that one isn't enough different to be worth the money" doesn't make much sense to me. Some things just aren't meant to make sense. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
Bill wrote: On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. I played with the 90mm somewhat before it was actually released to the public. It's an excellent lens, and if you like the FOV it's a very good lens. I don't, I've always found the 135mm (equivalent in this case) to be too short to be a telephoto and too long to be much good for anything else. I don't see how people can say "this FOV is not much use". There are so many things that go into choosing the focal length: distance from subject, size of subject, how much of the background you want to include or exclude, how far away you can get, how close you can get, and even desired depth of field. I could see saying that you only use certain focal lengths for a particular type of photo in a particular setting. If you only shoot portraits in one studio, then I could see having one lens for face shots, one for standing portraits, one for group portraits. I could see someone saying that they never need a fisheye, or a telephoto over 1,300mm, but to pick one focal length or field of view that is well in the range of the widest and longest in your toolkit and say "this FOV isn't much use", rather than "I already have this FOV and that one isn't enough different to be worth the money" doesn't make much sense to me. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On 1/6/2016 9:34 PM, Bill wrote: On 1/6/2016 1:02 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: But that's the thing, I have collected 85, 100 135 and 150mm lenses and used them all. When you jump from 85 to 150 in the same session you might notice but changing from 85 to 100 or 135 to 150, really doesn't make that much difference. The last of those lenses I got was the 135, and really I used it more than the 150 because it was more convenient. It wasn't that I liked it more or liked it less. I have the M 150mm. It's a lovely little lens. Do you have the K version or the M? I have the Super Takumar 150mm f4.0. I think it was one of the designs that carried over from M42 to K mount. Checked the optical formulas just now and they look the same for the Super Tak, and the SMCP, I used it for everything from sports to portraits. When I got rid of my original Spotmatic II I kept it to use on my first MX. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On 1/6/2016 1:02 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: But that's the thing, I have collected 85, 100 135 and 150mm lenses and used them all. When you jump from 85 to 150 in the same session you might notice but changing from 85 to 100 or 135 to 150, really doesn't make that much difference. The last of those lenses I got was the 135, and really I used it more than the 150 because it was more convenient. It wasn't that I liked it more or liked it less. I have the M 150mm. It's a lovely little lens. Do you have the K version or the M? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On 1/6/2016 9:08 AM, David J Brooks wrote: when i moved up from the box camera to the SP500 i had a 55 and a 105 prime Loved the 105 but never bought the 135. The same. One of my favorite lenses on the present Pentax format is the 70mm. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016, at 01:49 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > As I said he's knowledgeable. Sometimes he has good information. > Sometimes he passes his opinion as fact. > > The dismissal of the 135 aov just annoyed me, and his I dismissed his > dismissive review. > > I have plenty of opinions of my own, I just don't expect people to pay > to hear them. And good opinions they are I'm sure :-)> In defence of MJ (not that he necessarily needs defending) he doesn't actually expect payment. He'd just like his readers to click through links on his site when they want to buy from Amazon etc so that he gets a small contribution from those sellers. He does have a donation button but doesn't resort to the begging bowl (unlike Rockhead) or expect to be slung 5 bucks if you want to print out one of his posts (again, unlike Rockhead). Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ > > On 1/6/2016 8:21 AM, David Parsons wrote: > > This sounds like the people who don't like Howard Stern but tend to > > listen to him more than his fans. The reason given? To hear what > > he'll say next.. > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G6xu-J_Dmc > > > > If you don't like him, why are you reading his site? > > > > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:24 AM, P.J. Alling > > wrote: > > > >> Secondly, well, Mike Johnson. He's just annoying. He's a decent writer, > >> is > >> generally knowledgeable, and when he actually posts a photo he's made, it > >> doesn't hurt the eyes, (unlike Kennyboy), but his opinions are his own, and > >> he often mistakes them for fact, and like Kennyboy he expects to be paid > >> for > >> said opinions. > >> On 1/5/2016 8:56 AM, David Parsons wrote: > >>> No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually > >>> use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling > >>> wrote: > I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. > > FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any > point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is > all. > > -- http://www.fastmail.com - The way an email service should be -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
But that's the thing, I have collected 85, 100 135 and 150mm lenses and used them all. When you jump from 85 to 150 in the same session you might notice but changing from 85 to 100 or 135 to 150, really doesn't make that much difference. The last of those lenses I got was the 135, and really I used it more than the 150 because it was more convenient. It wasn't that I liked it more or liked it less. On 1/6/2016 10:08 AM, David J Brooks wrote: when i moved up from the box camera to the SP500 i had a 55 and a 105 prime Loved the 105 but never bought the 135. Dave On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:49 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: As I said he's knowledgeable. Sometimes he has good information. Sometimes he passes his opinion as fact. The dismissal of the 135 aov just annoyed me, and his I dismissed his dismissive review. I have plenty of opinions of my own, I just don't expect people to pay to hear them. On 1/6/2016 8:21 AM, David Parsons wrote: This sounds like the people who don't like Howard Stern but tend to listen to him more than his fans. The reason given? To hear what he'll say next.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G6xu-J_Dmc If you don't like him, why are you reading his site? On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:24 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: Secondly, well, Mike Johnson. He's just annoying. He's a decent writer, is generally knowledgeable, and when he actually posts a photo he's made, it doesn't hurt the eyes, (unlike Kennyboy), but his opinions are his own, and he often mistakes them for fact, and like Kennyboy he expects to be paid for said opinions. On 1/5/2016 8:56 AM, David Parsons wrote: No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On 2016-01-06 7:49 , P.J. Alling wrote: I have plenty of opinions of my own, I just don't expect people to pay to hear them. you can pay if you *really really* want to support the site (and get no ads), but the content is not infused with any expectation of payment; i read it in my RSS reader most of the time, and don't see ads there anyway -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
when i moved up from the box camera to the SP500 i had a 55 and a 105 prime Loved the 105 but never bought the 135. Dave On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:49 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > As I said he's knowledgeable. Sometimes he has good information. Sometimes > he passes his opinion as fact. > > The dismissal of the 135 aov just annoyed me, and his I dismissed his > dismissive review. > > I have plenty of opinions of my own, I just don't expect people to pay to > hear them. > > > On 1/6/2016 8:21 AM, David Parsons wrote: >> >> This sounds like the people who don't like Howard Stern but tend to >> listen to him more than his fans. The reason given? To hear what >> he'll say next.. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G6xu-J_Dmc >> >> If you don't like him, why are you reading his site? >> >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:24 AM, P.J. Alling >> wrote: >> >>> Secondly, well, Mike Johnson. He's just annoying. He's a decent writer, >>> is >>> generally knowledgeable, and when he actually posts a photo he's made, it >>> doesn't hurt the eyes, (unlike Kennyboy), but his opinions are his own, >>> and >>> he often mistakes them for fact, and like Kennyboy he expects to be paid >>> for >>> said opinions. >>> On 1/5/2016 8:56 AM, David Parsons wrote: No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > > I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. > > FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see > any > point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That > is > all. > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. >>> >>> -- >>> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve >>> immortality through not dying. >>> -- Woody Allen >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
As I said he's knowledgeable. Sometimes he has good information. Sometimes he passes his opinion as fact. The dismissal of the 135 aov just annoyed me, and his I dismissed his dismissive review. I have plenty of opinions of my own, I just don't expect people to pay to hear them. On 1/6/2016 8:21 AM, David Parsons wrote: This sounds like the people who don't like Howard Stern but tend to listen to him more than his fans. The reason given? To hear what he'll say next.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G6xu-J_Dmc If you don't like him, why are you reading his site? On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:24 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: Secondly, well, Mike Johnson. He's just annoying. He's a decent writer, is generally knowledgeable, and when he actually posts a photo he's made, it doesn't hurt the eyes, (unlike Kennyboy), but his opinions are his own, and he often mistakes them for fact, and like Kennyboy he expects to be paid for said opinions. On 1/5/2016 8:56 AM, David Parsons wrote: No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
This sounds like the people who don't like Howard Stern but tend to listen to him more than his fans. The reason given? To hear what he'll say next.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G6xu-J_Dmc If you don't like him, why are you reading his site? On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:24 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > Secondly, well, Mike Johnson. He's just annoying. He's a decent writer, is > generally knowledgeable, and when he actually posts a photo he's made, it > doesn't hurt the eyes, (unlike Kennyboy), but his opinions are his own, and > he often mistakes them for fact, and like Kennyboy he expects to be paid for > said opinions. > > On 1/5/2016 8:56 AM, David Parsons wrote: >> >> No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually >> use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. >> >> On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling >> wrote: >>> >>> I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. >>> >>> FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any >>> point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is >>> all. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve >>> immortality through not dying. >>> -- Woody Allen >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- My Year38 365 project http://year38.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
No, he's saying he doesn't like that focal length so there's no real reason to make it. Everything else is window dressing. First off, Fuji is producing a very nice system of "retro" cameras. I expect that they will sell enough of that lens to justify manufacturing them. Secondly, well, Mike Johnson. He's just annoying. He's a decent writer, is generally knowledgeable, and when he actually posts a photo he's made, it doesn't hurt the eyes, (unlike Kennyboy), but his opinions are his own, and he often mistakes them for fact, and like Kennyboy he expects to be paid for said opinions. I never used a 135mm in the good ol' days of film, my first real telephoto was a Super Takumar 150mm f4.0. But the e~135mm focal length grows on you. (Like a fungus). Now when I don't want to carry a big kit I carry 24mm, (~35mm), 43mm, (~58mm*), and 85mm (~135mm**). Gasp, that's a lot like what a lot of people started out with from the 1960s thru 1980s. Those focal lengths just work for general photography. The old timers who recommended them as a starter kit actually seem to have known something. *I know the 43mm is quite a bit longer than the equivelent of 58mm, but I defy anyone to tell the difference between a photo taken with the 43mm or a 35mm lens on an APS-C camera without a direct comparison taken from exactly the same spot. **Sure it's really e~130mm but once again see the * note above. On 1/5/2016 8:56 AM, David Parsons wrote: No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
David Parsons wrote: >No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually >use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. And he's saying it on his own blog which no one is actually obligated to read if they don't want to. >On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling >wrote: >> I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. >> >> FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any >> point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is >> all. -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
No, he's saying that it's a focal length that not many people actually use despite being a fairly easy focal length to make really well. On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. > > FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any > point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is > all. > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- My Year38 365 project http://year38.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
His reaction would certainly cheer me up. On 1/5/2016 1:53 AM, John wrote: On 1/3/2016 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. Should we send him cat photos to cheer him up? -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On 1/3/2016 10:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. Should we send him cat photos to cheer him up? -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016, at 02:38 PM, Bill wrote: > On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > > I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. > > > > FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see > > any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. > > That is all. > > > > > I played with the 90mm somewhat before it was actually released to the > public. It's an excellent lens, and if you like the FOV it's a very good > lens. > I don't, I've always found the 135mm (equivalent in this case) to be too > short to be a telephoto and too long to be much good for anything else. > I agree - and that's pretty much MJ's argument as well. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- -- -- http://www.fastmail.com - A fast, anti-spam email service. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
On 1/3/2016 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. I played with the 90mm somewhat before it was actually released to the public. It's an excellent lens, and if you like the FOV it's a very good lens. I don't, I've always found the 135mm (equivalent in this case) to be too short to be a telephoto and too long to be much good for anything else. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
OT: Meanwhile at TOP.
I'll report so you don't have to actually visit. FUJI has a new 90mm lens. It's very sharp. Mike Johnston doesn't see any point to it. The rest is just dressing to justify his feelings. That is all. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
