Re: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
Hi Adam, I bought one at 2003 for my Z-1p and continued to use it with digital bodies (until the DA* series arrived). It have served fine. Of course it has more distortion and is not as sharp as top lenses, but I've never said this lens is a crap, why did I had to spend my money. The other FAJ lenses, sorry to say, are quite crappy. First I was worried about the plastic mount, but after all those years it's still fully intact. I have also tested it head-to-head against early DA18-55 kit lens (with K10D) and liked FAJ much more then A. In a short - better geometry and less vignetting. Overall, it's surprisingly decent lens. It's much better than you would presume. BR, Margus Adam Maas wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On 8/16/2010 1:32 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: Optically they're supposed to be fairly good, but with a build of finest mouse-hair. I've one of these FAJ 18-35 lenses. Sans non-metal mount (I fail to characterize it in any more accurate way) the build is actually quite good for a lens worth $150 brand new (or thereabouts). In particular, comparing it with FA 24-90 which is higher up the ladder and more expensive, FAJ wins, sadly. Boris -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) -- Ira Bryant irabry...@sbcglobal.net -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:48 -0500, Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) Well - Let's MARK! that as well Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
2010/8/16 P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com: Optically they're supposed to be fairly good, but with a build of finest mouse-hair. and that while we're at it - MARK -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
Brian Walters wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:48 -0500, Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) Well - Let's MARK! that as well I hope you're not going to take that lying down, Ira -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
FYI, the FA20-35 works great with digital. The range may not be as interesting as it was with film, but image quality is wonderful. it's also surprisingly light. On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:56 AM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Brian Walters wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:48 -0500, Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) Well - Let's MARK! that as well I hope you're not going to take that lying down, Ira -- 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. -- Steve Desjardins -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
I don't know about the FAJ 18-35, but I was in the same position as you and went for the Samyang manual focus 19-35. I got the Phoenix-branded one, but it comes in many guises. I didn't use it for a long time because I really didn't have confidence in it, but I pulled it out the other day and thought it did pretty well. Much better than I expected. I used it on my ME Super with black and white film. Unfortunately, I haven't scanned any of the negatives or prints, so I can't show an example. I believe there is an auto-focus version, but I have read it is not as good. Funnily enough, just today I was looking at the FA 20-35 on the Keh website. I would really like to have that lens, but for me it is a film-specific lens and I don't use film enough to justify the cost to myself. I don't regret the Samyang but the 20-35 has a good reputation. Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Ira On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:48:47 -0400 Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam -- Ira Bryant irabry...@sbcglobal.net -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
I apologize, the Phoenix 19-35 is made by Cosina and not Samyang. I get my third-party sell-to-anyone OEMs confused sometimes. Anyway, the truth is probably a plus, not a minus. If I had my choice of Cosina-made lenses I would be a very happy man. Ira On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:14:16 -0500 Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I don't know about the FAJ 18-35, but I was in the same position as you and went for the Samyang manual focus 19-35. I got the Phoenix-branded one, but it comes in many guises. I didn't use it for a long time because I really didn't have confidence in it, but I pulled it out the other day and thought it did pretty well. Much better than I expected. I used it on my ME Super with black and white film. Unfortunately, I haven't scanned any of the negatives or prints, so I can't show an example. I believe there is an auto-focus version, but I have read it is not as good. Funnily enough, just today I was looking at the FA 20-35 on the Keh website. I would really like to have that lens, but for me it is a film-specific lens and I don't use film enough to justify the cost to myself. I don't regret the Samyang but the 20-35 has a good reputation. Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Ira On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:48:47 -0400 Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam -- Ira Bryant irabry...@sbcglobal.net -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On 8/17/2010 9:48 PM, Adam Maas wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam Optically they're supposed to be fairly good, but with a build of finest mouse-hair. -- His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy. -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.
