Re: pentax 35-80 f4/5.6 any good?
Folks- I just picked up a zx-m and the default lens was the A 35-80 f4/5.6 not the F version. Are u sure your's is an F? To the original poster of this thread, what version do u have the F or the A? Anyone w/experience w/either lens, I'd welcome additional opinions. be well robo In a message dated 9/2/01 1:57:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2001 19:46:03 -0600 From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax 35-80 f4/5.6 any good? The F version of this lens was the default lens on my (M)Z(X) 50 kit. A lot of my PUG submittals were made with it. For an inexpensive, default lens, it is surprisingly good. An acquaintance borrowed a negative shot with it, and had a 20 x 30 print made. At any viewing distance except right next to it, the print is quite sharp. (Film was old Agfa Optima 100.) Then I decided to try the (now discontinued) Tokina AF 28-105, which is rated on Photodo as a sharper lens. In my experience with images scanned and printed at about 8 x 10, the Pentax F 35-80 was sharper than the Tokina, and the images had more contrast. Shots with the Tokina seem to lack contrast. I no longer have the Tokina. So, yes, this is overall (in my experience) a pretty good lens, and a bargain at the price. Joe - 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 35-80 f4/5.6 any good?
The F is an older model superseded by the FA. If you check Boz's site you can see that the F and A venisons of this lens are both identical optical formulas. http://www.BDimitrov.de/kmp/ At 02:20 PM 9/2/2001 -0400, you wrote: Folks- I just picked up a zx-m and the default lens was the A 35-80 f4/5.6 not the F version. Are u sure your's is an F? To the original poster of this thread, what version do u have the F or the A? Anyone w/experience w/either lens, I'd welcome additional opinions. be well robo In a message dated 9/2/01 1:57:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2001 19:46:03 -0600 From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax 35-80 f4/5.6 any good? The F version of this lens was the default lens on my (M)Z(X) 50 kit. A lot of my PUG submittals were made with it. For an inexpensive, default lens, it is surprisingly good. An acquaintance borrowed a negative shot with it, and had a 20 x 30 print made. At any viewing distance except right next to it, the print is quite sharp. (Film was old Agfa Optima 100.) Then I decided to try the (now discontinued) Tokina AF 28-105, which is rated on Photodo as a sharper lens. In my experience with images scanned and printed at about 8 x 10, the Pentax F 35-80 was sharper than the Tokina, and the images had more contrast. Shots with the Tokina seem to lack contrast. I no longer have the Tokina. So, yes, this is overall (in my experience) a pretty good lens, and a bargain at the price. Joe - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax 35-80 f4/5.6 any good?
The F version of this lens was the default lens on my (M)Z(X) 50 kit. A lot of my PUG submittals were made with it. For an inexpensive, default lens, it is surprisingly good. An acquaintance borrowed a negative shot with it, and had a 20 x 30 print made. At any viewing distance except right next to it, the print is quite sharp. (Film was old Agfa Optima 100.) Then I decided to try the (now discontinued) Tokina AF 28-105, which is rated on Photodo as a sharper lens. In my experience with images scanned and printed at about 8 x 10, the Pentax F 35-80 was sharper than the Tokina, and the images had more contrast. Shots with the Tokina seem to lack contrast. I no longer have the Tokina. So, yes, this is overall (in my experience) a pretty good lens, and a bargain at the price. Joe - 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 35-80 f4/5.6 any good?
Can't seem to find any performance data on this, seems to be new on the market. Can someone at least hazard a guess whether it is optically better than Pentax's not highly regarded 28-80? It's on offer with a MZ5n body for effectively GBP40, GBP10 less than the 28-80. Perhaps I should look at another standard zoom (not at ATX prices though)? Thanks in advance Alan - 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 35-80 f4/5.6 any good?
I have a 35-80 and it is ok for a low end zoom, at 35 there is some barrell distortion and at 50 and 80 it is fine. Very contrasty but you need to shoot at f8 to get good sharpness, it's a little soft wide open. --- Alan B. McCruden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can't seem to find any performance data on this, seems to be new on the market. Can someone at least hazard a guess whether it is optically better than Pentax's not highly regarded 28-80? It's on offer with a MZ5n body for effectively GBP40, GBP10 less than the 28-80. Perhaps I should look at another standard zoom (not at ATX prices though)? Thanks in advance Alan Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca - 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 .
