Re: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
At 9:22 AM +0200 5/31/13, Alan C wrote: Wise decision. Won't upset the bank balance either. Both those lenses give good results. I mostly use my FA 100-300 for game photography. I also have a Vivitar similar to yours (A version) which I haven't really used much on the K110 but now I'll give it a spin. I bought my 100-300 off of another listmember some eight years ago and used it regularly, but my big complaint with it is that it is too slow, especially at the 300mm end. A few months ago I dug out the Series 1 (Mark's version 2) and started using that. It's an F3.5 max aperture throughout its range, so that is better, but it's manual focus (and a one-touch, which I don't really like) and non-A, so you end up fiddling wit the green button. Optically, though, it is wonderful, and the close focus ability is great to have. Down the road I'd like an F2.8 zoom in that same general range, even if it means going with a Sigma or Tamron. -- Steve Sharpe d...@eastlink.ca http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
Wise decision. Won't upset the bank balance either. Both those lenses give good results. I mostly use my FA 100-300 for game photography. I also have a Vivitar similar to yours (A version) which I haven't really used much on the K110 but now I'll give it a spin. Alan C -Original Message- From: Steve Sharpe Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 9:32 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions? At 2:12 PM -0500 5/30/13, Darren Addy wrote: I think that there are fewer bad lenses than there are lenses used badly. Mark! Thanks for everyone's words of wisdom. When all is said and done, I've decided to forego the 70-200 and stick with my Vivitar Series 1 70-210, and to give my FA 100-300 F4.5-5.6 another chance. -- Steve Sharpe d...@eastlink.ca • http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html -- 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. -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
At 2:12 PM -0500 5/30/13, Darren Addy wrote: I think that there are fewer bad lenses than there are lenses used badly. Mark! Thanks for everyone's words of wisdom. When all is said and done, I've decided to forego the 70-200 and stick with my Vivitar Series 1 70-210, and to give my FA 100-300 F4.5-5.6 another chance. -- Steve Sharpe d...@eastlink.ca http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > I think that there are fewer bad lenses than there are lenses used badly. MARK! Sadly, he's out of range. -- -bmw -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
I think that there are fewer bad lenses than there are lenses used badly. On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: > Eeuw, why would you want non-coated glass. > Flare, internal reflections, veiling flare. > Regards, Bob S. > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Alan C wrote: >> Refer to: >> >> http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/zooms/_non-SMC/index.html >> >> Note there is no "SMC" prefix. They may be optically the same. >> >> Alan C >> >> John Francis wrote: >> >> Are you sure you meant to put that qualifier there? >> >> AFAIK the F line (effectively the first auto-focus series) >> had multi-coating, just like the earlier M and A lenses, >> and the subsequent FA lenses. The difference between the >> F and the FA lenses is mostly in the information that is >> transmitted over the digital signal pin; while the exact >> details escape me now I think it might be that the FA >> lenses also tell the camera the focus distance the lens is >> set to, which allows for more complex exposure metering. >> >> >> -- >> 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. > > -- > 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. -- "Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art" - Peter Galassi -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: > Eeuw, why would you want non-coated glass. > Flare, internal reflections, veiling flare. It would save some people the effort of adding those things in Photoshop. -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
Eeuw, why would you want non-coated glass. Flare, internal reflections, veiling flare. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Alan C wrote: > Refer to: > > http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/zooms/_non-SMC/index.html > > Note there is no "SMC" prefix. They may be optically the same. > > Alan C > > John Francis wrote: > > Are you sure you meant to put that qualifier there? > > AFAIK the F line (effectively the first auto-focus series) > had multi-coating, just like the earlier M and A lenses, > and the subsequent FA lenses. The difference between the > F and the FA lenses is mostly in the information that is > transmitted over the digital signal pin; while the exact > details escape me now I think it might be that the FA > lenses also tell the camera the focus distance the lens is > set to, which allows for more complex exposure metering. > > > -- > 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. -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
Also refer to: http://www.mosphotos.com/PentaxLensesExplained.html Page down to the paragraph about non-SMC lenses. Alan C (Sorry, used wrong subject header) -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
Refer to: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/zooms/_non-SMC/index.html Note there is no "SMC" prefix. They may be optically the same. Alan C John Francis wrote: Are you sure you meant to put that qualifier there? AFAIK the F line (effectively the first auto-focus series) had multi-coating, just like the earlier M and A lenses, and the subsequent FA lenses. The difference between the F and the FA lenses is mostly in the information that is transmitted over the digital signal pin; while the exact details escape me now I think it might be that the FA lenses also tell the camera the focus distance the lens is set to, which allows for more complex exposure metering. -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
No personal experience, but here are the shots taken with the FA 70-200mm f4-5.6 that were accepted into the Pentax Photo Gallery: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/photos/gallery/query?camera=&lens=1380 On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:28 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: > The F 70-210 is the best of all of them, a good copy will be sharp though > out it's zoom range, a bad copy will be a little soft at 210mm until you > stop down a bit, I've had both. The Takumar F 70-200 and a version of the > Pentax F share the cosmetics of the SMC P F 70-210 but neither is up to even > a /bad/ copy. > > > On 5/29/2013 8:59 AM, Alan C wrote: >> >> The FA 70-200 is an SMC Pentax FA. Good reviews. (I have the 100-300mm >> which is very good) >> >> The F 70-200 is a Pentax F (Cheaper line without MC). There is no SMC >> Pentax F 70-200mm >> >> There is also an SMC Pentax F 70-210 ED with good reviews and a Takumar F >> (cheap line without MC). >> >> Seems the SMC and/or ED glass versions are superior. >> >> Alan C >> >> >> >> > > > -- > There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive > failure, and those that will. > > > -- > 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. -- "Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art" - Peter Galassi -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
I believe the Takumar F and the Pentax, (not SMC), F in 70-200 are the same lens with different names. The Pentax F IIRC also came in FA like livery but was pretty much the same lens as the Takumar. The FA 70-200mm f4.0~5.6 and the F 70-210mm f4.0~5.6 were different optical formulas. The F is supposed to be better optically, (sharper, whatever that means, since there's no objective measure of sharpness), at the long end, the FA has better electronics and coatings. You pays your money and you takes your choice. Here's a sample of the SMC-P F 70=210mm at 210mm wide open. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20%20watchdogrev.html (Camera Pentax *ist-Ds) On 5/29/2013 12:35 PM, John Francis wrote: On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 02:59:50PM +0200, Alan C wrote: The FA 70-200 is an SMC Pentax FA. Good reviews. (I have the 100-300mm which is very good) The F 70-200 is a Pentax F (Cheaper line without MC). Are you sure you meant to put that qualifier there? AFAIK the F line (effectively the first auto-focus series) had multi-coating, just like the earlier M and A lenses, and the subsequent FA lenses. The difference between the F and the FA lenses is mostly in the information that is transmitted over the digital signal pin; while the exact details escape me now I think it might be that the FA lenses also tell the camera the focus distance the lens is set to, which allows for more complex exposure metering. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
The F 70-210 is the best of all of them, a good copy will be sharp though out it's zoom range, a bad copy will be a little soft at 210mm until you stop down a bit, I've had both. The Takumar F 70-200 and a version of the Pentax F share the cosmetics of the SMC P F 70-210 but neither is up to even a /bad/ copy. On 5/29/2013 8:59 AM, Alan C wrote: The FA 70-200 is an SMC Pentax FA. Good reviews. (I have the 100-300mm which is very good) The F 70-200 is a Pentax F (Cheaper line without MC). There is no SMC Pentax F 70-200mm There is also an SMC Pentax F 70-210 ED with good reviews and a Takumar F (cheap line without MC). Seems the SMC and/or ED glass versions are superior. Alan C -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 02:59:50PM +0200, Alan C wrote: > The FA 70-200 is an SMC Pentax FA. Good reviews. (I have the > 100-300mm which is very good) > > The F 70-200 is a Pentax F (Cheaper line without MC). Are you sure you meant to put that qualifier there? AFAIK the F line (effectively the first auto-focus series) had multi-coating, just like the earlier M and A lenses, and the subsequent FA lenses. The difference between the F and the FA lenses is mostly in the information that is transmitted over the digital signal pin; while the exact details escape me now I think it might be that the FA lenses also tell the camera the focus distance the lens is set to, which allows for more complex exposure metering. -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
The FA 70-200 is an SMC Pentax FA. Good reviews. (I have the 100-300mm which is very good) The F 70-200 is a Pentax F (Cheaper line without MC). There is no SMC Pentax F 70-200mm There is also an SMC Pentax F 70-210 ED with good reviews and a Takumar F (cheap line without MC). Seems the SMC and/or ED glass versions are superior. Alan C -- 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: 70-200 F4-5.6 FA opinions?
Steve, The FA 70-200/4-5.6 with the power zoom for the PZ-1? I was quite happy with it, still own it. But we called it the wobbly one. It would wobble a bit while focusing, but never showed bad pictures as a result. Regards, Bob S. On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Steve Sharpe wrote: > What are people's thoughts on this lens? Someone local is selling one. I've > scanned the web and have found little or nothing in the way of reviews or > opinions. The F version seems to be highly regarded, but it has ED > element(s) while it doesn't look like the FA does. > > Thanks in advance! > > -- > > Steve Sharpe > d...@eastlink.ca > • > > http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html > > -- > 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. -- 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.
