Re: Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating)
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004, Pat Curran wrote: Thanks to all who responded to my request for a rating of the above lens. Looks like it's one to avoid; pity as KEH have one rated 'bargain' ($94.00) at the moment. You can get a K135/3.5 or M135/3.5 easy with that kind of money. If you add customs and taxes (you are liable to those in Ireland, right?), even the 135/2.5 may be in reach. It looks like the SMC 'M' lenses very often out do their newer 'A' stable mates from what I can see reading PDML posts. Not easy to make that generalisation. SMC-A coatings are probably better for a start. 2) When I upgrade to the * ist D next year, I want to carry over as much compatibility as possible with my lenses. My understanding of the situation is that what you really lose is Tv and P modes. If you use them a lot, problem :-) Kostas
Re: Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating)
Kostas Kavoussanakis mused: On Sun, 28 Nov 2004, Pat Curran wrote: Thanks to all who responded to my request for a rating of the above lens. Looks like it's one to avoid; pity as KEH have one rated 'bargain' ($94.00) at the moment. You can get a K135/3.5 or M135/3.5 easy with that kind of money. If you add customs and taxes (you are liable to those in Ireland, right?), even the 135/2.5 may be in reach. It looks like the SMC 'M' lenses very often out do their newer 'A' stable mates from what I can see reading PDML posts. Not easy to make that generalisation. SMC-A coatings are probably better for a start. 2) When I upgrade to the * ist D next year, I want to carry over as much compatibility as possible with my lenses. My understanding of the situation is that what you really lose is Tv and P modes. If you use them a lot, problem :-) Kostas Not quite. That's what you lose if you use a pre-A lens on a camera such as a PZ-1p, an MZ-S, or many other cameras from the Pentax line. On the *ist-D bodies you also lose Av and P modes, and live metering. (in other words: on a camera with an aperture simulator coupling you have something that works rather like an ME series body; on a camera without that coupling you're back to the days of the Spotmatic II).
RE: Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating)
That's true, John, in a way. But it's still a little more convenient, that the stopped down measuring is done electronically and the camera (*ist D/DS) remembers the metered value/appropriate shutter speed. I only use 4-5 K or M lenses on the *ist D (35, 105, 135, 300, 70-150mm), so it's not really a big issue. My most used lenses are A, F or FA. On the other hand - if the *ist D had an aperture simulator, I might get some more (good) old lenses. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 29. november 2004 18:32 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating) Kostas Kavoussanakis mused: On Sun, 28 Nov 2004, Pat Curran wrote: Thanks to all who responded to my request for a rating of the above lens. Looks like it's one to avoid; pity as KEH have one rated 'bargain' ($94.00) at the moment. You can get a K135/3.5 or M135/3.5 easy with that kind of money. If you add customs and taxes (you are liable to those in Ireland, right?), even the 135/2.5 may be in reach. It looks like the SMC 'M' lenses very often out do their newer 'A' stable mates from what I can see reading PDML posts. Not easy to make that generalisation. SMC-A coatings are probably better for a start. 2) When I upgrade to the * ist D next year, I want to carry over as much compatibility as possible with my lenses. My understanding of the situation is that what you really lose is Tv and P modes. If you use them a lot, problem :-) Kostas Not quite. That's what you lose if you use a pre-A lens on a camera such as a PZ-1p, an MZ-S, or many other cameras from the Pentax line. On the *ist-D bodies you also lose Av and P modes, and live metering. (in other words: on a camera with an aperture simulator coupling you have something that works rather like an ME series body; on a camera without that coupling you're back to the days of the Spotmatic II).
Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating)
Thanks to all who responded to my request for a rating of the above lens. Looks like it's one to avoid; pity as KEH have one rated 'bargain' ($94.00) at the moment. It looks like the SMC 'M' lenses very often out do their newer 'A' stable mates from what I can see reading PDML posts. I have two reasons for hunting out used 'A' lenses over the older 'M's. 1) My 35mm system is built around two Super A bodies. 2) When I upgrade to the * ist D next year, I want to carry over as much compatibility as possible with my lenses. Regards Thanks, Pat
Re: Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating)
It looks like the SMC 'M' lenses very often out do their newer 'A' stable mates from what I can see reading PDML posts. In my opinion, I do not think that this is usually the case, Pat. In many cases, the M and A lenses are optically virtually identical. Sometimes there may be mere subtle optical differences between them. Sometimes the A lenses may show distinct optical improvements (but not really all that often). The A 135/2.8 you asked about is certainly one glaring exception, and I don't think your statement quoted above is true. I have two reasons for hunting out used 'A' lenses over the older 'M's. 1) My 35mm system is built around two Super A bodies. 2) When I upgrade to the * ist D next year, I want to carry over as much compatibility as possible with my lenses. These are two good reasons for choosing A lenses, where possible, Pat. But, don't overlook good older lenses, which can be employed in useful fashion on your Super A's and on the *ist D (and DS). Fred
Re: Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating)
Thanks Fred, I wonder if sometimes I am too attached to Pentax glass - after all there are lots of other good independent lenses out there from the likes of Tamron, Sigma and others. I remember paying horrendous money for a Pentax aluminium trunk case in the mid 80's just because it had the Pentax badge - I was young and single then ;) - now I see independent aluminium cases for a fraction of the price I paid. Still, I have at least let go of my blinkered view on buying only NEW Pentax gear - but a lot of therapy still to go before I put non Pentax glass on the Super As ;) Pat - Original Message - From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pat Curran [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 8:35 PM Subject: Re: Thanks Guys (135/2.8 A Rating) It looks like the SMC 'M' lenses very often out do their newer 'A' stable mates from what I can see reading PDML posts. In my opinion, I do not think that this is usually the case, Pat. In many cases, the M and A lenses are optically virtually identical. Sometimes there may be mere subtle optical differences between them. Sometimes the A lenses may show distinct optical improvements (but not really all that often). The A 135/2.8 you asked about is certainly one glaring exception, and I don't think your statement quoted above is true. I have two reasons for hunting out used 'A' lenses over the older 'M's. 1) My 35mm system is built around two Super A bodies. 2) When I upgrade to the * ist D next year, I want to carry over as much compatibility as possible with my lenses. These are two good reasons for choosing A lenses, where possible, Pat. But, don't overlook good older lenses, which can be employed in useful fashion on your Super A's and on the *ist D (and DS). Fred
