Re: F 35-135 NOT good in the aquarium
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 19:47:50 +0200, Mark Stringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FA 28-105 f4-5.6 pz model was a favorite of mine for a film camera. Seconded. I still have it. Very good lense, not much heavier than the 35-135 But not exactly light either :o) -- Regards, Lucas
RE: F 35-135 NOT good in the aquarium
FA 28-105 f4-5.6 pz model was a favorite of mine for a film camera. I still have it. Very good lense, not much heavier than the 35-135 and nearly half the close focus. Still around, cheap $100-120 at KEH. Mark Stringer
RE: F 35-135 NOT good in the aquarium
CW bummed. Needs a new walk-around zoom. When I first read your subject line, I thought maybe you had dropped the lens in the tank. Or something. Based on the rave reports here, I bought the FA 28-105 f3.2-45 for my walkaround zoom, and like it a lot. Very sharp, and a glance at Bojidar's site shows that it focuses 10 inches closer than the F 35-135. *UncaMikey
RE: F 35-135 NOT good in the aquarium
G'day. I have just got a Sigma 24-135 for the Ds as a walk around lens. Tried it last weekend. Very good considering the zoom factor. Sharp enough above 5.6. But the 2.8 @ 24mm is handy. Bit on the large size and a tad heavy, But I like a bit of weight for stability reasons. Got it from Cameta via Ebay. Hooroo. Regards, Trevor. Australia -Original Message- From: cbwaters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 7 April 2006 5:58 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: F 35-135 NOT good in the aquarium We went to the new aquarium in Atlanta today. (A very good outing!) The lens simply won't focus close enough for this application. If I'd have thought about it before we left, I'd have figured it out but...um I didn't CW bummed. Needs a new walk-around zoom.
