Tokina AT-X SP 60-120mm F2.8 manual focus Super-Portrait lens
Just got ahold of my second copy of subject lens (yes, its so good, I wanted a spare). They are hard to find in a PENTAX PK mount. Recently one showed up on ebay BIN for 200 pounds in LN condition so I grabbed it. When I bought my first one twenty years ago, I found the zoom range ideal for people shots of all types on film. Seems even better with the digital K-1 heres a simple sample nature photo showing the incredible resolution for a zoom https://www.jchriso.com/temp/tree.jpg ( resized for web ) this is the same photo but shows a 100% mag crop of the center of the image https://www.jchriso.com/temp/treecrop.jpg -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Shade for Tokina ATX PRo 28-70/2.6-2.8? - And some interesting history
This was always my favorite walking around lens. Mine failed a few years ago when the 'A' contact ring wore out. It's the lens I dropped & Tokina fixed under warranty even though I told them I'd dropped it & that anyway it was out of warranty because I bought it used. I got maybe 10 good years use out of it after they repaired it. Igor's question prompted me to check KEH & eBay and I found one in Pentax Kaf mount in Japan on eBay with a "Buy it Now" price just about same as I remember paying KEH for the first one back in 2003. It arrived at my front door just a few minutes ago. I'm so happy. I will try to be a little more careful with this one. 8^) On 6/30/2020 13:25:25, John wrote: If you're referring to the autofocus AT-X PRO 287 (f/2.8 28-70mm), the BH-774 works with it. It used to be my workhorse lens before the 'a' contact failed and that's the hood I have. It fits & is reasonable (although the price may not be) On 6/24/2020 17:20:31, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Hi All! I have misplaced the shade for my Tokina ATX Pro 28-70/2.6-2.8 lens (circa 1996), and I am looking at my options for the replacement. I know that a few list members have used this lens (at least before). So, my questions: 1. If you still have it (or the box/manual): what is the original model number for that shade? 2. I am trying to figure out if the current BH774 (which is listed for 19-35mm lens) is the same, or at least if it would work on my 28-70. (It shouldn't cause vignetting, but I wonder if it would fit and be reasonable.) 3. Do you any other suitable options? And some interesting info: While searching for the specs, I've found this interesting article about the history of this lens and possible connection to the Angenieux lens. https://cameragx.com/2018/04/11/the-truth-about-the-angenieux-28-70-af-zoom/ Cheers, Igor -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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: Shade for Tokina ATX PRo 28-70/2.6-2.8? - And some interesting history
If you're referring to the autofocus AT-X PRO 287 (f/2.8 28-70mm), the BH-774 works with it. It used to be my workhorse lens before the 'a' contact failed and that's the hood I have. It fits & is reasonable (although the price may not be) On 6/24/2020 17:20:31, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Hi All! I have misplaced the shade for my Tokina ATX Pro 28-70/2.6-2.8 lens (circa 1996), and I am looking at my options for the replacement. I know that a few list members have used this lens (at least before). So, my questions: 1. If you still have it (or the box/manual): what is the original model number for that shade? 2. I am trying to figure out if the current BH774 (which is listed for 19-35mm lens) is the same, or at least if it would work on my 28-70. (It shouldn't cause vignetting, but I wonder if it would fit and be reasonable.) 3. Do you any other suitable options? And some interesting info: While searching for the specs, I've found this interesting article about the history of this lens and possible connection to the Angenieux lens. https://cameragx.com/2018/04/11/the-truth-about-the-angenieux-28-70-af-zoom/ Cheers, Igor -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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.
Shade for Tokina ATX PRo 28-70/2.6-2.8? - And some interesting history
Hi All! I have misplaced the shade for my Tokina ATX Pro 28-70/2.6-2.8 lens (circa 1996), and I am looking at my options for the replacement. I know that a few list members have used this lens (at least before). So, my questions: 1. If you still have it (or the box/manual): what is the original model number for that shade? 2. I am trying to figure out if the current BH774 (which is listed for 19-35mm lens) is the same, or at least if it would work on my 28-70. (It shouldn't cause vignetting, but I wonder if it would fit and be reasonable.) 3. Do you any other suitable options? And some interesting info: While searching for the specs, I've found this interesting article about the history of this lens and possible connection to the Angenieux lens. https://cameragx.com/2018/04/11/the-truth-about-the-angenieux-28-70-af-zoom/ Cheers, Igor -- 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
On 30/7/18, J.C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed: >do you have it in pentax k mount, or olympus om mount? It's in K mount with a K-to-MFT adapter. Works very well. Bought a long metal lens hood also. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__UK Shoot / Edit and || (O) |Live Broadcast News -- _ -- 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
do you have it in pentax k mount, or olympus om mount? On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:37:49 -0400, Steve Cottrell wrote: On 30/7/18, J.C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed: Car is about 65mm long. Camera was about 30 inch away. F16 ist DS on camera flash. 100% crop from 6Mp image note the excellent contrast and fine resolution, you can make out the metallic flake in the paint job. its a real nice lens. https://www.jchriso.com/temp/DB.jpg Good job JC. I have this lens and use it with an Olympus Pen F. Extremely versatile on a half-frame MFT camera with 5-axis stabilisation. Bought it many years ago and fortunately held onto it until I found it worked so well with the Oly. -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ -- 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
On 30/7/18, J.C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed: >Car is about 65mm long. >Camera was about 30 inch away. F16 ist DS on camera flash. >100% crop from 6Mp image >note the excellent contrast and fine resolution, >you can make out the metallic flake in the paint job. >its a real nice lens. > >https://www.jchriso.com/temp/DB.jpg Good job JC. I have this lens and use it with an Olympus Pen F. Extremely versatile on a half-frame MFT camera with 5-axis stabilisation. Bought it many years ago and fortunately held onto it until I found it worked so well with the Oly. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__UK Shoot / Edit and || (O) |Live Broadcast News -- _ -- 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
Agree. Really fine fine detail, J. C.! J Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 30, 2018, at 6:27 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > > DB.jpg -- 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
Although my sample photo doesnt show it, the lens is known for excellent bokeh. It and the vivitar series 1 version both go by the nickname "Bokina". On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 10:09:19 -0400, Paul Stenquist wrote: Nice detail. A fine lens. Paul On Jul 30, 2018, at 9:27 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: Car is about 65mm long. Camera was about 30 inch away. F16 ist DS on camera flash. 100% crop from 6Mp image note the excellent contrast and fine resolution, you can make out the metallic flake in the paint job. its a real nice lens. https://www.jchriso.com/temp/DB.jpg -- 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. -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ -- 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
Nice detail. A fine lens. Paul > On Jul 30, 2018, at 9:27 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > > Car is about 65mm long. > Camera was about 30 inch away. F16 ist DS on camera flash. > 100% crop from 6Mp image > note the excellent contrast and fine resolution, > you can make out the metallic flake in the paint job. > its a real nice lens. > > https://www.jchriso.com/temp/DB.jpg > > -- > 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
Interesting. He mentions the Vivitar Series 1, 90/2.5 and says it’s heavier. It is indeed because it’s all metal and built like a tank. He also fails to mention that the Vivitar came with an optical converter that makes it 1:1. I was heartbroken because I thought workers had stolen my pristine copy, but I’m happy to report that I found hiding at the rear of a shelf just the other day. Paul > On Jul 30, 2018, at 9:40 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > > here is a review of the lens: > > https://phillipreeve.net/blog/tokina-x-macro-90mm-12-5-review/ > > jco > > > > > >> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:27:54 -0400, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >> >> Car is about 65mm long. >> Camera was about 30 inch away. F16 ist DS on camera flash. >> 100% crop from 6Mp image >> note the excellent contrast and fine resolution, >> you can make out the metallic flake in the paint job. >> its a real nice lens. >> >> https://www.jchriso.com/temp/DB.jpg >> > > > -- > J.C. O'Connell > hifis...@gate.net > - > Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ > > -- > 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: MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
here is a review of the lens: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/tokina-x-macro-90mm-12-5-review/ jco On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:27:54 -0400, J.C. O'Connell wrote: Car is about 65mm long. Camera was about 30 inch away. F16 ist DS on camera flash. 100% crop from 6Mp image note the excellent contrast and fine resolution, you can make out the metallic flake in the paint job. its a real nice lens. https://www.jchriso.com/temp/DB.jpg -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ -- 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.
MACRO shot with Tokina AT-X 90mm F2.5 PKA Manual Focus
Car is about 65mm long. Camera was about 30 inch away. F16 ist DS on camera flash. 100% crop from 6Mp image note the excellent contrast and fine resolution, you can make out the metallic flake in the paint job. its a real nice lens. https://www.jchriso.com/temp/DB.jpg -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
The more light you have hitting the metering sensor the more accurately it is measured. That's pretty much true with any meter. Pentax makes a number of over optimistic assumptions I think, but the calculations preformed from a wide open reading of the existing light, seem to be much better than the readings I get stopping down. I've tested it with the FA 43mm limited. Using the lens in dim light, set at f4-5.6 (on A), I get pretty good exposures. Stop down metering in the same situation with the same aperture yields wildly varying shutter speeds, usually running to under exposure due to much shorter shutter speeds*, but sometimes to much longer shutter speeds. The reason I tested it at all was that I noticed that the M 85mm in dim light was often giving extremely under exposed images, (sometimes extremely over exposed, but not as often). The diaphragm doesn't seem to be sticky, it doesn't seem to have problems in bright light. However when using the 43mm limited and A 24 f2.8 I had fewer metering problems. *I've been experiencing this since the *ist-D days. The K20D was a little better, the K-5II a little better than that, but open aperture metering still gives better, more consistent exposures in dim light. On 2/24/2016 3:25 PM, Larry Colen wrote: P.J. Alling wrote: Bottom line is the only reason that makes any real sense. The rational has variously been that it was inaccurate, but it isn't as inaccurate as stop down metering can be. OK, this really confuses me, because when you meter wide open, you are assuming perfect linearity from wide open to the projected aperture, and I seem to recall reading an article that explains wu this assumption tends to be overly optimistic, without even considering the difference between t-stops and f-stops. I believe that the problem is also exacerbated on digital sensors which are also particularly sensitive to the direction at which light hits the sensor (though less so now). I've got a few brain cells that are tickled thinking that this might be related to why split prism (and microprism) viewfinders look so much darker at smaller apertures than at larger ones. Also, while things seem to have improved in the past few years, I have found Pentax metering so unpredictably inaccurate that if I don't want my highlights blown out, in the vast majority of cases I use the green button (or other exposure estimation), a test exposure and the histogram (or at least bracketing) for the vast majority of my shots anyways, so my workflow with K and M lenses, even without an aperture simulator, to usually be identical to using A and AF lenses. Since every moving part increases complexity, cost, and opportunities for the camera to break, the ability to use unreliable auto exposure on a few $40 used lenses falls somewhere between un-needed and undesirable to me. Features that I would like to see, which would cost Ricoh nothing but a little bit of programming (which I'd probably do for them for free given the source code): Having the RAW/Fx button not only put the camera into on occasionally used mode, but take it out of that mode with a simple press. As it is, if I press the button accidentally, it will change the mode of my camera, and then I have to go through the menus to undo what I accidentally did. Having the histogram read raw files, rather than the jpegs so I can tell what my sensor is really doing. Having astrotracer read the lens focal length from the manual settings so I can use it with manual focus lenses (or telescopes). Restore the ability to set astrotracer to times less than 10 seconds. Often, when shooting the full moon, I'll want astrotracer to stop the blur, but only want a 1 second exposure. Honestly, I'd rather it went down further than that. While we're at it having a lunar astrotracer mode, because the moon moves differently than the stars relative to the ground. Having astrotracer work like every other exposure mode so that I don't have to go through all of the menu rigamarole everytime I want to review a frame or change the shutter time. Have bracketing work on astrotracer. Have astrotracer/non-astrotracer bracketing so that when you are shooting night landscapes you can get clear shots of both the foreground and the stars to recomposite later. (come on guys, astrotracer is cool, you advertise it, polish it up so that it's not just a kludgey parlor trick). Being able to set exposure times longer than 30 seconds, with the mode of being able to easily take dark field frames at the times of my own choosing without having to fiddle with a lens cap. Have a metering mode that takes a sample picture (or several) and get set the exposure (or exposure and bracketing) to capture all of the data, rather than taking a guess and having to guess based upon the inaccurate jpeg based histogram. While we're at it, have the info display report percentage of blown out pixels
Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Larry Colen wrote: >The other explanation is that to the vast majority of their customers an >aperture simulator is about as useful as being able to use a hand crank >to start their car if the battery is dead. Nailed it. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
P.J. Alling wrote: Bottom line is the only reason that makes any real sense. The rational has variously been that it was inaccurate, but it isn't as inaccurate as stop down metering can be. OK, this really confuses me, because when you meter wide open, you are assuming perfect linearity from wide open to the projected aperture, and I seem to recall reading an article that explains wu this assumption tends to be overly optimistic, without even considering the difference between t-stops and f-stops. I believe that the problem is also exacerbated on digital sensors which are also particularly sensitive to the direction at which light hits the sensor (though less so now). I've got a few brain cells that are tickled thinking that this might be related to why split prism (and microprism) viewfinders look so much darker at smaller apertures than at larger ones. Also, while things seem to have improved in the past few years, I have found Pentax metering so unpredictably inaccurate that if I don't want my highlights blown out, in the vast majority of cases I use the green button (or other exposure estimation), a test exposure and the histogram (or at least bracketing) for the vast majority of my shots anyways, so my workflow with K and M lenses, even without an aperture simulator, to usually be identical to using A and AF lenses. Since every moving part increases complexity, cost, and opportunities for the camera to break, the ability to use unreliable auto exposure on a few $40 used lenses falls somewhere between un-needed and undesirable to me. Features that I would like to see, which would cost Ricoh nothing but a little bit of programming (which I'd probably do for them for free given the source code): Having the RAW/Fx button not only put the camera into on occasionally used mode, but take it out of that mode with a simple press. As it is, if I press the button accidentally, it will change the mode of my camera, and then I have to go through the menus to undo what I accidentally did. Having the histogram read raw files, rather than the jpegs so I can tell what my sensor is really doing. Having astrotracer read the lens focal length from the manual settings so I can use it with manual focus lenses (or telescopes). Restore the ability to set astrotracer to times less than 10 seconds. Often, when shooting the full moon, I'll want astrotracer to stop the blur, but only want a 1 second exposure. Honestly, I'd rather it went down further than that. While we're at it having a lunar astrotracer mode, because the moon moves differently than the stars relative to the ground. Having astrotracer work like every other exposure mode so that I don't have to go through all of the menu rigamarole everytime I want to review a frame or change the shutter time. Have bracketing work on astrotracer. Have astrotracer/non-astrotracer bracketing so that when you are shooting night landscapes you can get clear shots of both the foreground and the stars to recomposite later. (come on guys, astrotracer is cool, you advertise it, polish it up so that it's not just a kludgey parlor trick). Being able to set exposure times longer than 30 seconds, with the mode of being able to easily take dark field frames at the times of my own choosing without having to fiddle with a lens cap. Have a metering mode that takes a sample picture (or several) and get set the exposure (or exposure and bracketing) to capture all of the data, rather than taking a guess and having to guess based upon the inaccurate jpeg based histogram. While we're at it, have the info display report percentage of blown out pixels, and noise levels based on analysis of the data. When shooting for HDR, being able to bracket more than two stops between exposures. When I've got 14 stops of latitude, adding two or four stops doesn't really gain me a lot in the cases where I need the added latitude, and I don't want to have to shoot five exposures to get the latitude I want. Being able to choose bracketing independently of what the auto exposure value is. Being able to bracket the focus (when shooting macros with an autofocus lens). Recording the shutter press time stamps more accurately than the nearest round second, and by when the shutter is activated rather than when the file is written. I'm not sure which of these cause bracketed photos to show up in lightroom in some bizarre, semi random order. Wifi based flash control (now theoretically possible with the K-1). The only one that makes sense is Pentax thought that they could get away with orphaning all those K mount lenses prior to the A series and add a few bucks per unit to the bottom line. The Shit Storm that hit them was a huge surprise, (which shows how tone deaf a company can be), so they got some software engineers to institute the green button kludge. The other explanation is that to the vast majority of their customers
Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
It's worth noting that we are likely to see even the remaining mechanical diaphragm actuation lever eliminated in the future and all interaction between the camera body taking place through electronic communication. Nikon is already moving in that direction and making lenses with built-in electronically-controlled diaphragms (Canon has had only electronic diaphragm control since the introduction of the EF mount in 1987). Though it's early days, such lenses are not compatible with any Nikon DSLR prior to the D3. Tamron's two new lenses are electronic-only for diaphragm control and incompatible with early Nikon DSLRs. This is likely why Tamron and others offer so few lenses in Pentax mount it's much easier to deal with multiple lens mounts when there's as little mechanical interaction between camera body and lens as possible. When Pentax does introduce electronic aperture control in the future I expect them to go the Nikon route and make most lenses and bodies backward and forward compatible. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Paul Stenquist wrote: >Leaving the aperture simulator off probably leads to some lens sales, >as it makes using the K and M versions somewhat cumbersome, thereby >encouraging upgrades. On the other hand, I dont think a lot of >users care. In my opinion, the camera works fine without it. Only a tiny minority of Pentax shooters care about the mechanical aperture-position sensor (and I suspect they're all old curmudgeons on the PDML!) which, after all, is only needed for lenses made between 1975 and 1982 a small fraction of the K-mount's 40+ year history. According to Don Nelson it added too much to the cost of camera manufacture, both in parts and assembly (and now it would also necessitate re-writing lots of computer code because none of Pentax's DSLRs have provision for reading/using data from the potentiometer). -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Leaving the aperture simulator off probably leads to some lens sales, as it makes using the K and M versions somewhat cumbersome, thereby encouraging upgrades. On the other hand, I don’t think a lot of users care. In my opinion, the camera works fine without it. I don’t mind using the green button or a handheld incident meter. Paul > On Feb 24, 2016, at 9:45 AM, John wrote: > > I'm sure I've asked this before and had it explained to me, but can > someone give me a rationale for why Pentax got rid of the aperture > simulator, and perhaps why they don't bring it back since so many Pentax > users want it? I gather that it would make Pentax DSLRs even more > backwards compatible with Pentax's legendary glass? > > I don't really have an opinion either way regarding the aperture > simulator since the few 'M' lenses I do have work quite happily with my > K1000 & LX. > > > > On 2/23/2016 11:16 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: >> It has no aperture simulator so it supports them the same way every >> Pentax DSLR since the *ist-D has. >> >> On 2/23/2016 9:32 PM, mail1 wrote: >>> The question is will the K-1 support non KA M lenses? >>> >>> Jonathan >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of DagT >>> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:33 PM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8 >>> >>> I´ve tried it on K-3 and at least in that format it is great. «Kenspo» >>> on Pentaxforums is almost a neighbour and he loves it for rock >>> conserts and models. Very good flare control and sharpness. We will >>> see soon if it is works on K-1 he claims to be the first to get one >>> (or two). >>> >>> DagT >>> >>> >>> >>>> 19. feb. 2016 kl. 20.18 skrev Paul Stenquist : >>>> >>>> What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to >>>> need, but i haven’t read much about it. >>>> >>>> Paul > > -- > Science - Questions we may never find answers for. > Religion - Answers we must never question. > > -- > 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Bottom line is the only reason that makes any real sense. The rational has variously been that it was inaccurate, but it isn't as inaccurate as stop down metering can be. Space in the camera has been touted as an issue, but the K-1, (and for that matter the K10/20D), cameras aren't that small, so there's probably space it would probably have required slightly different packaging. The only one that makes sense is Pentax thought that they could get away with orphaning all those K mount lenses prior to the A series and add a few bucks per unit to the bottom line. The Shit Storm that hit them was a huge surprise, (which shows how tone deaf a company can be), so they got some software engineers to institute the green button kludge. I doubt that leaving the aperture simulator off the original *ist Film camera and *ist-D saved them much more than ¥5000 in manufacturing costs, but over the production run of several hundred thousand cameras that kind of savings is nothing to sneeze at. On 2/24/2016 9:45 AM, John wrote: I'm sure I've asked this before and had it explained to me, but can someone give me a rationale for why Pentax got rid of the aperture simulator, and perhaps why they don't bring it back since so many Pentax users want it? I gather that it would make Pentax DSLRs even more backwards compatible with Pentax's legendary glass? I don't really have an opinion either way regarding the aperture simulator since the few 'M' lenses I do have work quite happily with my K1000 & LX. On 2/23/2016 11:16 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: It has no aperture simulator so it supports them the same way every Pentax DSLR since the *ist-D has. On 2/23/2016 9:32 PM, mail1 wrote: The question is will the K-1 support non KA M lenses? Jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of DagT Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:33 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8 I´ve tried it on K-3 and at least in that format it is great. «Kenspo» on Pentaxforums is almost a neighbour and he loves it for rock conserts and models. Very good flare control and sharpness. We will see soon if it is works on K-1 he claims to be the first to get one (or two). DagT 19. feb. 2016 kl. 20.18 skrev Paul Stenquist : What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- 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.
Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
I'm sure I've asked this before and had it explained to me, but can someone give me a rationale for why Pentax got rid of the aperture simulator, and perhaps why they don't bring it back since so many Pentax users want it? I gather that it would make Pentax DSLRs even more backwards compatible with Pentax's legendary glass? I don't really have an opinion either way regarding the aperture simulator since the few 'M' lenses I do have work quite happily with my K1000 & LX. On 2/23/2016 11:16 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: It has no aperture simulator so it supports them the same way every Pentax DSLR since the *ist-D has. On 2/23/2016 9:32 PM, mail1 wrote: The question is will the K-1 support non KA M lenses? Jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of DagT Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:33 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8 I´ve tried it on K-3 and at least in that format it is great. «Kenspo» on Pentaxforums is almost a neighbour and he loves it for rock conserts and models. Very good flare control and sharpness. We will see soon if it is works on K-1 he claims to be the first to get one (or two). DagT 19. feb. 2016 kl. 20.18 skrev Paul Stenquist : What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
It has no aperture simulator so it supports them the same way every Pentax DSLR since the *ist-D has. On 2/23/2016 9:32 PM, mail1 wrote: The question is will the K-1 support non KA M lenses? Jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of DagT Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:33 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8 I´ve tried it on K-3 and at least in that format it is great. «Kenspo» on Pentaxforums is almost a neighbour and he loves it for rock conserts and models. Very good flare control and sharpness. We will see soon if it is works on K-1 he claims to be the first to get one (or two). DagT 19. feb. 2016 kl. 20.18 skrev Paul Stenquist : What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- 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. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- 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.
RE: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
The question is will the K-1 support non KA M lenses? Jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of DagT Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:33 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8 I´ve tried it on K-3 and at least in that format it is great. «Kenspo» on Pentaxforums is almost a neighbour and he loves it for rock conserts and models. Very good flare control and sharpness. We will see soon if it is works on K-1 he claims to be the first to get one (or two). DagT > 19. feb. 2016 kl. 20.18 skrev Paul Stenquist : > > What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, > but i haven’t read much about it. > > Paul > -- > 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. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
I´ve tried it on K-3 and at least in that format it is great. «Kenspo» on Pentaxforums is almost a neighbour and he loves it for rock conserts and models. Very good flare control and sharpness. We will see soon if it is works on K-1 he claims to be the first to get one (or two). DagT > 19. feb. 2016 kl. 20.18 skrev Paul Stenquist : > > What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, > but i haven’t read much about it. > > Paul > -- > 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
I'm fine with SDM, and I wouldn't want Pentax to change the label just to trick people into thinking they changed the technology. I have four SDM lenses and haven't had a problem in years. I do think they made some changes following a rash of early problems, Paul via phone > On Feb 20, 2016, at 5:34 AM, jtainter wrote: > > > jtainter Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:04:23 -0800 > > Paul, its a Tamron lens, and is supposed to be pretty good. Pentax puts their > own coating on it. > > The forthcoming 15-30 and 70-200 are also Tamron lenses. They are also > supposed > to be good. > > But in some ways Pentax never learns. They are still putting the SDM label on > new lenses. > > So what are Pentax's lens designers doing? > > Joe > > --- > > I need to correct some of this. The 70-200 F2.8 is being developed in-house. > > Joe > > > -- > 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
jtainter Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:04:23 -0800 Paul, its a Tamron lens, and is supposed to be pretty good. Pentax puts their own coating on it. The forthcoming 15-30 and 70-200 are also Tamron lenses. They are also supposed to be good. But in some ways Pentax never learns. They are still putting the SDM label on new lenses. So what are Pentax's lens designers doing? Joe --- I need to correct some of this. The 70-200 F2.8 is being developed in-house. Joe -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
P.J. Alling Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:41:50 -0800 Pentax Fora seems to think that the new lens is made by Tamron, but AFAIK Pentax never had a relationship with them, while a number of Pentax and Tokina lenses were in recent history co developed, including the 10-17mm fisyeye zoom and the 12-24mm. __ As someone else noted, Pentax has gotten super zooms and the old FA 2X TC from Tamron. I suspect the current DA 18-135 is a Tamron design, also possibly the DA 16-85 (which is now my go-to lens). As for the Pentax/Tokina lenses, Tokina developed the 12-24. All the other joint Pentax/Tokina lenses were designed by Pentax. As for the rebadged Tamron lenses, I suspect that Pentax put off a decision on the full-framer until the last minute. Then there wasn't time to develop lenses for it in-house. Hence they went to Tamron. And Jun Hirakawa now works for Tamron, and he may have been involved in designing them. These rebadges are reviewed to be quite good. Joe -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
On 2/19/2016 5:02 PM, jtainter wrote: Paul, its a Tamron lens, and is supposed to be pretty good. Pentax puts their own coating on it. The forthcoming 15-30 and 70-200 are also Tamron lenses. They are also supposed to be good. But in some ways Pentax never learns. They are still putting the SDM label on new lenses. So what are Pentax's lens designers doing? Joe Maybe somewhere in the transition from independent company to Hoya to Ricoh they got laid off & are now working for Sigma/Tamron/Tokina. -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Yep, that has to be correct. It looks like the Tamron, and it's priced about the same. Works for me. Paul via phone Paul via phone > On Feb 19, 2016, at 5:53 PM, John wrote: > > According to the reviews I've seen on line, it's a re-badged Tamron lens. > >> On 2/19/2016 3:05 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: >> It's supposed to be the same as the Tokina, hopefully a product of the >> Pentax/Tokina collaboration of a few years ago that produced the 10-17mm >> fisheye, not just a rebrand. Popular Photography has an online review >> of it, they think it's good. >> >> http://www.popphoto.com/lens-test-tokina-at-x-24-70mm-f-28-pro-fx >> >>> On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >>> What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to >>> need, but i haven’t read much about it. >>> >>> Paul > > -- > Science - Questions we may never find answers for. > Religion - Answers we must never question. > > -- > 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
On 2/19/2016 5:48 PM, Larry Colen wrote: P.J. Alling wrote: Pentax Fora seems to think that the new lens is made by Tamron, but AFAIK Pentax never had a relationship with them, while a number of Other than the Pentax/Tamron 18-250? Well then I stand corrected, err actually sit corrected. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- 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.
Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
According to the reviews I've seen on line, it's a re-badged Tamron lens. On 2/19/2016 3:05 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: It's supposed to be the same as the Tokina, hopefully a product of the Pentax/Tokina collaboration of a few years ago that produced the 10-17mm fisheye, not just a rebrand. Popular Photography has an online review of it, they think it's good. http://www.popphoto.com/lens-test-tokina-at-x-24-70mm-f-28-pro-fx On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Both the D-FA 24-70/2.8 and the D-FA 15-30/2.8 lenses appear to be rebadged Tamrons. However, the most famous lens designer working for Pentax during the FA*-series era (Mr. Jun Hirakawa, designer of the FA* 1.4/85mm) now works for Tamron, hence there must be some Pentax heritage in above new "Pentax" lenses. Cheers, Dario -Messaggio originale- From: jtainter Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 11:02 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8 Paul, its a Tamron lens, and is supposed to be pretty good. Pentax puts their own coating on it. The forthcoming 15-30 and 70-200 are also Tamron lenses. They are also supposed to be good. But in some ways Pentax never learns. They are still putting the SDM label on new lenses. So what are Pentax's lens designers doing? Joe -- 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. --- Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
P.J. Alling wrote: Pentax Fora seems to think that the new lens is made by Tamron, but AFAIK Pentax never had a relationship with them, while a number of Other than the Pentax/Tamron 18-250? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Pentax Fora seems to think that the new lens is made by Tamron, but AFAIK Pentax never had a relationship with them, while a number of Pentax and Tokina lenses were in recent history co developed, including the 10-17mm fisyeye zoom and the 12-24mm. I've seen no official announcement of a collaboration between Ricoh/Pentax and Tamaron, can't say for sure there wasn't one, but we know for sure there was and maybe is one between Pentax and Tokina. It wouldn't be the first time that a rumor was started became common knowledge on the internet and was traced back to some idle speculation. On 2/19/2016 5:20 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: I thought it was this lens http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/search?N=11084645&InitialSearch=yes&sts=pi Paul via phone On Feb 19, 2016, at 5:02 PM, jtainter wrote: Paul, its a Tamron lens, and is supposed to be pretty good. Pentax puts their own coating on it. The forthcoming 15-30 and 70-200 are also Tamron lenses. They are also supposed to be good. But in some ways Pentax never learns. They are still putting the SDM label on new lenses. So what are Pentax's lens designers doing? Joe -- 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. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- 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.
Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
I thought it was this lens http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/search?N=11084645&InitialSearch=yes&sts=pi Paul via phone > On Feb 19, 2016, at 5:02 PM, jtainter wrote: > > Paul, its a Tamron lens, and is supposed to be pretty good. Pentax puts their > own coating on it. > > The forthcoming 15-30 and 70-200 are also Tamron lenses. They are also > supposed to be good. > > But in some ways Pentax never learns. They are still putting the SDM label on > new lenses. > > So what are Pentax's lens designers doing? > > Joe > > > > > > > > > -- > 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Paul, its a Tamron lens, and is supposed to be pretty good. Pentax puts their own coating on it. The forthcoming 15-30 and 70-200 are also Tamron lenses. They are also supposed to be good. But in some ways Pentax never learns. They are still putting the SDM label on new lenses. So what are Pentax's lens designers doing? Joe -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
No need to expect, it's already arrived and in stock at B&H, (as well as other fine retailers). http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1187673-REG/pentax_21310_24_70mm_f_2_8ed_sdm_wr.html Weather sealed with HD coatings. On 2/19/2016 4:18 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: The Tokina lens is not available, but there's a Pentax branded lens that's said to be virtually identical. Some say it differs only in coatings. It's more costly but considerably less expensive than Canon and Nikon 24/70s. I expect that it is also weather sealed and may have the Pentax HD coatings. Paul via phone On Feb 19, 2016, at 4:07 PM, John wrote: I don't think the Tokina 24-70/2.8 is or was available in a Pentax mount. I had the Tokina 28-70/2.8 ATX-Pro, and I loved it. It is unfortunately unusable now because the contact that tells the camera body it's locked in the 'A' position is worn& cannot be repaired. This is the lens I dropped& broke in 2004, that Tokina repaired under warranty even though I told them I had purchased it second hand from KEH. It was my workhorse lens for almost 10 years. I would buy another in a heartbeat if I ever find one. I'd also consider the 28-80/2.8 if I ran across it. I now have the comparable Sigma 24-70/2.8. The only thing I don't like about it is the 28-70/2.8 was internal focus/internal zoom& didn't change length. Looking at the Tokina 24-70/2.8, it looks like it does the same thing. On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- 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.
Re: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Paul Stenquist wrote: The Tokina lens is not available, but there's a Pentax branded lens that's said to be virtually identical. Some say it differs only in coatings. It's more costly but considerably less expensive than Canon and Nikon 24/70s. I expect that it is also weather sealed and may have the Pentax HD coatings. Paul via phone On Feb 19, 2016, at 4:07 PM, John wrote: I don't think the Tokina 24-70/2.8 is or was available in a Pentax mount. I had the Tokina 28-70/2.8 ATX-Pro, and I loved it. It is unfortunately unusable now because the contact that tells the camera body it's locked in the 'A' position is worn& cannot be repaired. This is the lens I dropped& broke in 2004, that Tokina repaired under warranty even though I told them I had purchased it second hand from KEH. It was my workhorse lens for almost 10 years. I would buy another in a heartbeat if I ever find one. I'd also consider the 28-80/2.8 if I ran across it. I now have the comparable Sigma 24-70/2.8. The only thing I don't like about it is the 28-70/2.8 was internal focus/internal zoom& didn't change length. Looking at the Tokina 24-70/2.8, it looks like it does the same thing. On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
The Tokina lens is not available, but there's a Pentax branded lens that's said to be virtually identical. Some say it differs only in coatings. It's more costly but considerably less expensive than Canon and Nikon 24/70s. Paul via phone > On Feb 19, 2016, at 4:07 PM, John wrote: > > I don't think the Tokina 24-70/2.8 is or was available in a Pentax mount. > > I had the Tokina 28-70/2.8 ATX-Pro, and I loved it. > > It is unfortunately unusable now because the contact that tells the > camera body it's locked in the 'A' position is worn & cannot be > repaired. This is the lens I dropped & broke in 2004, that Tokina > repaired under warranty even though I told them I had purchased it > second hand from KEH. > > It was my workhorse lens for almost 10 years. > > I would buy another in a heartbeat if I ever find one. I'd also consider > the 28-80/2.8 if I ran across it. > > I now have the comparable Sigma 24-70/2.8. > > The only thing I don't like about it is the 28-70/2.8 was internal > focus/internal zoom & didn't change length. Looking at the Tokina > 24-70/2.8, it looks like it does the same thing. > >> On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >> What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to >> need, but i haven’t read much about it. >> >> Paul > > -- > Science - Questions we may never find answers for. > Religion - Answers we must never question. > > -- > 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
I don't think the Tokina 24-70/2.8 is or was available in a Pentax mount. I had the Tokina 28-70/2.8 ATX-Pro, and I loved it. It is unfortunately unusable now because the contact that tells the camera body it's locked in the 'A' position is worn & cannot be repaired. This is the lens I dropped & broke in 2004, that Tokina repaired under warranty even though I told them I had purchased it second hand from KEH. It was my workhorse lens for almost 10 years. I would buy another in a heartbeat if I ever find one. I'd also consider the 28-80/2.8 if I ran across it. I now have the comparable Sigma 24-70/2.8. The only thing I don't like about it is the 28-70/2.8 was internal focus/internal zoom & didn't change length. Looking at the Tokina 24-70/2.8, it looks like it does the same thing. On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
Sounds like it will work for me. The 15-30 and 80-200 would make the kit perfect, all for less than an ff body from the high end nameplates. Paul via phone > On Feb 19, 2016, at 3:05 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: > > It's supposed to be the same as the Tokina, hopefully a product of the > Pentax/Tokina collaboration of a few years ago that produced the 10-17mm > fisheye, not just a rebrand. Popular Photography has an online review of it, > they think it's good. > > http://www.popphoto.com/lens-test-tokina-at-x-24-70mm-f-28-pro-fx > >> On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >> What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, >> but i haven’t read much about it. >> >> Paul > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- 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. -- 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: pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
It's supposed to be the same as the Tokina, hopefully a product of the Pentax/Tokina collaboration of a few years ago that produced the 10-17mm fisheye, not just a rebrand. Popular Photography has an online review of it, they think it's good. http://www.popphoto.com/lens-test-tokina-at-x-24-70mm-f-28-pro-fx On 2/19/2016 2:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- 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.
pentax/tokina 24-70/2.8
What’s the consensus on this lens? That’s a focal length I’m going to need, but i haven’t read much about it. Paul -- 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.
Tokina 80-200mm f4.5-5.6 Zoom Lens for Pentax Manual Focus Cameras
If anyone is interested in a well-buildt inexpensive manual focus push zoom, Wolfe camera is one selling on Amazon this tokina 80-200 for less than $50.00 new in the box. Mine arrived in two days. Brief hand-held testing looks sharp with nice contrast. These were designed for FF. Five left when last I checked. Tokina 80-200mm f4.5-5.6 Zoom Lens for Pentax Manual Focus Cameras -- 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: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
Darren,
Thanks for the followup. I had never heard about "Angenieux", either in
the context of this lens or in any other context.
So, it was interesting to read this (fairly recent) writeup.
Also, based on the description, I think my lens is actually "II",
as it has a bayonet hood.
Igor
On 2/16/2015 1:17 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
No personal experience with the lens, but Igor has pretty much nailed
it, except he left out the part about the Angenieux f/2.6 being the
predecessor.
This page has all the various iterations. Not finding a lot of people
going ga-ga over it on digital, as they did on film (where the
Angenieux was considered a Cult Classic).
http://www.johncaz.net/blog/tokina-at-x-pro-af-28-70mm-26-28
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
There were 3-4 different versions of that lens.
Mine is the older (oldest?), ("the original"?) Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70
f/2.6-2.8. And that's the only version I used.
I loved it with the film camera, even though I am
somewhat disappointed with its performance with all 3 digital bodies I've
tried it on.
Then there was the same lens with the designation "II"
The others were: Tokina AT-X 28-70/2.8 (not "PRO") and
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-80/2.8, and also
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70/2.8 SV.
The non-PRO version had rotating front element, and IIRC, 72mm filter.
The rest had 77mm filter.
SV was lighter and reportedly not as good as the preceeding versions.
See, e.g. comments here:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/276-tokina-af-28-70mm-f28-26-at-x-pro-ii-lab-test-report--review?start=1
HTH,
Igor
J C OConnell Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:27:10 -0800 wrote:
I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for
around $200 used, I already have an excellent
manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough
especially
on aps format.
I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and
what
the
pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens.
--
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: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
The front of mine looks like this one:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/36-sold-items/27203d1233538601-sale-sold-tokina-x-pro-28-70mm-f2-8-tokina-2.jpg
http://preview.tinyurl.com/okgfyse
Straight "AT-X PRO", no II, no SV, no 2.6.
On the side it says "Tokina AT-X PRO 28-70mm"
On 2/16/2015 1:00 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
There were 3-4 different versions of that lens.
Mine is the older (oldest?), ("the original"?) Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70
f/2.6-2.8. And that's the only version I used.
I loved it with the film camera, even though I am
somewhat disappointed with its performance with all 3 digital bodies I've
tried it on.
Then there was the same lens with the designation "II"
The others were: Tokina AT-X 28-70/2.8 (not "PRO") and
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-80/2.8, and also
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70/2.8 SV.
The non-PRO version had rotating front element, and IIRC, 72mm filter.
The rest had 77mm filter.
SV was lighter and reportedly not as good as the preceeding versions.
See, e.g. comments here:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/276-tokina-af-28-70mm-f28-26-at-x-pro-ii-lab-test-report--review?start=1
HTH,
Igor
J C OConnell Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:27:10 -0800 wrote:
I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for
around $200 used, I already have an excellent
manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially
on aps format.
I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and
what the
pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens.
--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.
--
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: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
Since Pentax just released a 70-210 F2.8 for FF digital, I wouldnt be
surprised if they
also put out a 28-70 F2.8 for FF digital to go along with the 70-210.
jco
On 2/16/2015 1:17 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
No personal experience with the lens, but Igor has pretty much nailed
it, except he left out the part about the Angenieux f/2.6 being the
predecessor.
This page has all the various iterations. Not finding a lot of people
going ga-ga over it on digital, as they did on film (where the
Angenieux was considered a Cult Classic).
http://www.johncaz.net/blog/tokina-at-x-pro-af-28-70mm-26-28
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
There were 3-4 different versions of that lens.
Mine is the older (oldest?), ("the original"?) Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70
f/2.6-2.8. And that's the only version I used.
I loved it with the film camera, even though I am
somewhat disappointed with its performance with all 3 digital bodies I've
tried it on.
Then there was the same lens with the designation "II"
The others were: Tokina AT-X 28-70/2.8 (not "PRO") and
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-80/2.8, and also
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70/2.8 SV.
The non-PRO version had rotating front element, and IIRC, 72mm filter.
The rest had 77mm filter.
SV was lighter and reportedly not as good as the preceeding versions.
See, e.g. comments here:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/276-tokina-af-28-70mm-f28-26-at-x-pro-ii-lab-test-report--review?start=1
HTH,
Igor
J C OConnell Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:27:10 -0800 wrote:
I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for
around $200 used, I already have an excellent
manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially
on aps format.
I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and what
the
pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens.
--
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: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
No personal experience with the lens, but Igor has pretty much nailed
it, except he left out the part about the Angenieux f/2.6 being the
predecessor.
This page has all the various iterations. Not finding a lot of people
going ga-ga over it on digital, as they did on film (where the
Angenieux was considered a Cult Classic).
http://www.johncaz.net/blog/tokina-at-x-pro-af-28-70mm-26-28
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
>
> There were 3-4 different versions of that lens.
>
> Mine is the older (oldest?), ("the original"?) Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70
> f/2.6-2.8. And that's the only version I used.
> I loved it with the film camera, even though I am
> somewhat disappointed with its performance with all 3 digital bodies I've
> tried it on.
>
> Then there was the same lens with the designation "II"
> The others were: Tokina AT-X 28-70/2.8 (not "PRO") and
> Tokina AT-X Pro 28-80/2.8, and also
> Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70/2.8 SV.
> The non-PRO version had rotating front element, and IIRC, 72mm filter.
> The rest had 77mm filter.
>
> SV was lighter and reportedly not as good as the preceeding versions.
> See, e.g. comments here:
> http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/276-tokina-af-28-70mm-f28-26-at-x-pro-ii-lab-test-report--review?start=1
>
> HTH,
>
> Igor
>
>
>
> J C OConnell Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:27:10 -0800 wrote:
>
>> I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for
>> around $200 used, I already have an excellent
>> manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially
>> on aps format.
>> I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and what
>> the
>> pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens.
>
>
> --
> 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.
--
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.
--
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: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
There were 3-4 different versions of that lens.
Mine is the older (oldest?), ("the original"?) Tokina AT-X Pro
28-70 f/2.6-2.8. And that's the only version I used.
I loved it with the film camera, even though I am
somewhat disappointed with its performance with all 3 digital bodies I've
tried it on.
Then there was the same lens with the designation "II"
The others were: Tokina AT-X 28-70/2.8 (not "PRO") and
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-80/2.8, and also
Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70/2.8 SV.
The non-PRO version had rotating front element, and IIRC, 72mm filter.
The rest had 77mm filter.
SV was lighter and reportedly not as good as the preceeding versions.
See, e.g. comments here:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/276-tokina-af-28-70mm-f28-26-at-x-pro-ii-lab-test-report--review?start=1
HTH,
Igor
J C OConnell Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:27:10 -0800 wrote:
I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for
around $200 used, I already have an excellent
manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially
on aps format.
I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and what the
pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens.
--
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: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
On 2/14/2015 4:26 PM, J C OConnell wrote: I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for around $200 used, I already have an excellent manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially on aps format. I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and what the pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens. The f/2.8 Tokina AT-X PRO 28-70mm is the first auto-focus lens I bought to go along with the PZ-1p that was my first auto-focus SLR. Within a year of getting the PZ-1p, Pentax came out with the *ist-D. On APS-C cameras the field of view makes it the equivalent of a 42-105mm zoom. That's the only real "con" I can think of for that lens; on APS-C you lose the wide end of the zoom range. I don't think that's going to be a problem for Pentax's putative Full-Frame DSLR. Just before I deployed to Iraq in 2004, I dropped the lens damaging the zoom gear & I had to send it to Tokina for repair. They returned it to me in Iraq, repaired under warranty & it's been my most frequently used lens for the last decade. Since I got a K-3 I've been having a problem where I mount the lens & the camera displays an error "--" indicating it can't read the aperture. I sent it to Erik Hendrickson in Knoxville. He didn't find anything wrong with it so he just cleaned the contacts & checked the AF gears. Since I got it back, I noticed that the lens only gives the "--" error when I zoom to 28mm. From about 30mm on up, it works fine. I think the problem is related to wear in the zoom ring & in the detent that locks the aperture selector into the 'A' position. I've been thinking about sending it to Tokina to see if they can/will fix the problem. It's a great lens. I don't think I've ever seen one offered for sale since I bought mine. As an alternative to sending it to Tokina, I've been thinking about putting in a "wish list" request with KEH to see if I can get another one. -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
Kennyboy has a review of that lens on his website, It might be one of his good reviews, (he does have good ones occasionally) or it may be one of his trademark hands off reviews, I' can't be bothered to read it, but it might actually have useful information. On 2/14/2015 4:26 PM, J C OConnell wrote: I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for around $200 used, I already have an excellent manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially on aps format. I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and what the pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- 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.
Re: Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
On 14/2/15, J C OConnell, discombobulated, unleashed: >I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for >around $200 used, I already have an excellent >manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially >on aps format. >I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and what the >pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens. Years ago I owned the Tokina 28-70 AT-X Pro II 2.6/2.8 in K mount and I remember being very impressed by it. It is heavy and made of neutron star innards! I recall it being sharp when stopped down a couple, but reasonable wide open. It was certainly amongst my kit up until the time I bought an EOS D60 in 2003 and sold the bulk of my K mount kit for some lenses to go with a DSLR. I may have even obtained an EF version of the Tokina - but memory does not serve well here. <http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/276-tokina-af-28-70mm-f28-26-at-x-pro- ii-lab-test-report--review> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_D60> -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production -- _ -- 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.
Anyone tried the Tokina AT-X AF 28-70 F2.8 Lens?
I was thinking about picking up one of these lenses, they sell for around $200 used, I already have an excellent manual focus 35-70 F2.8 AT-X, but 35mm just isnt wide enough especially on aps format. I was wondering if anyone here had tried the 28-70 F2.8 AT-X AF and what the pros and cons to it were. Thanks in advance. P.S. This is a FF lens. -- 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: FSF: Some Pentax A, FA, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc lenses and 1.7x AF Adapter
Collin, What kind of shape is the K1000 in? Is the shutter slow? On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > And that's a *very* nice price on the FA50/1.4. > > At my end ... I sometimes don't wait until Friday ... > > Here's a bunch of stuff FS that's not on eBay yet. Just in case anyone is > interested.: > 1. Pentax K1000 with Ricoh "P" 50/1.7 lens. Well-used but priced for the > student. $35 > 2. Pentax Program Plus. Body works great. Winder is a freebee -- it's > untested. $30 > 3. Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 lens. A modern classic Pentax lens. $125. > > Plus shipping. PayPal accepted. > > > > -- > 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: FSF: Some Pentax A, FA, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc lenses and 1.7x AF Adapter
And that's a *very* nice price on the FA50/1.4. At my end ... I sometimes don't wait until Friday ... Here's a bunch of stuff FS that's not on eBay yet. Just in case anyone is interested.: 1. Pentax K1000 with Ricoh "P" 50/1.7 lens. Well-used but priced for the student. $35 2. Pentax Program Plus. Body works great. Winder is a freebee -- it's untested. $30 3. Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 lens. A modern classic Pentax lens. $125. Plus shipping. PayPal accepted. -- 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: FSF: Some Pentax A, FA, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc lenses and 1.7x AF Adapter
You are a wise woman with exquisite taste, Christine :-) Cheers, —M. \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment On 2 December 2013 17:38, Christine Nielsen wrote: > Ooo... Me! Possibly... Will send you a message off list. > > :) > > -c > > > On Dec 2, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Miserere wrote: > > Wow, no bites at all? Now y'all are going to force me to go sell my > wares at Pentax Forums :-\ > > By the way, anyone interested in a black 31 Ltd? > > Cheers, > > > —M. > >\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com > >http://EnticingTheLight.com >A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment > > > > On 29 November 2013 20:10, Miserere wrote: >> Pulled out a box from the closet and am doing some early Spring >> Cleaning to get funds for upcoming purchases. Some of these are >> difficult sales for me, but hopefully they'll go to a good home. >> Scores are out of 10. >> >> Auto Focus: >> >> - FA 50mm f/1.4 - $225 >> External: 9 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Original box, caps. >> >> - FA 20mm f/2.8 - $625 >> External: 9 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Caps. >> >> - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - $340 >> External: 9 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Original box, caps, hood. Hoya filter. >> >> - Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 - $250 >> External: 9.7 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Original box, caps (generic back), hood. Filter. >> >> - Pentax-F 1.7x AF "Fairydust" Adapter - $400 >> External: 9.8 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Caps. SB80-80 pouch. >> >> - Sigma DG 70-300mm f/4-5.6 - $100 >> External: 8.5 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Original box, caps. Tiffen filter. >> >> - Tokina AT-X 400mm f/5.6 - $500 >> External: 8.5 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Original front cap (generic back), tripod collar. Slide-out hood >> >> >> Manual Focus: >> >> - Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 - $160 >> External: 9.5 >> Optics: 9.9 >> Includes: Original caps. >> >> - Vivitar PKA 24mm f/2 (made by Komine) - $200 >> External: 9.5 >> Optics: 9.5 >> Includes: Caps. >> >> - Tokina PKA 28-70mm f/2.8-4.3 - $60 >> External: 9.0 >> Optics: 9.5 >> Includes: Original front cap (generic back). >> Photo: bit.ly/18cmL5y >> >> - Vivitar 135mm f/2.5 M42 (manufactured by Tokina) - $110 >> External: 8.0 >> Optics: 9.5 >> Includes: Original front cap (generic back). >> Photos: >> * http://bit.ly/1ccMLSS >> * http://bit.ly/1ccMMGx >> >> - Vivitar 70-150mm 2x Matched TC - $10 >> No idea what to do with this, but if someone else does... It appears >> to be new or almost. >> >> - Star-D PKA 28mm f/2.8 (focuses to 1:4) - $50 >> It's in very good overall shape. >> >> >> Other Stuff: >> >> - Pentax D-BG2 Grip (for K10D and K20D) - $60 >> Condition: 9.5 >> Includes: Original box, plastic pin cap. >> >> Shipping: >> >> In the US I'll use USPS Priority mail with tracking. If you buy more >> than one lens then shipping per lens will be cheaper. >> For outside the US I'll ship standard USPS. If you want something more >> expensive, we can work it out if you're willing to pay for it. >> >> If anyone wants to make reasonable offers on these items cos they >> don't think the prices are reasonable, go ahead. >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> —M. >> >>\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com >> >>http://EnticingTheLight.com >>A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment > > -- > 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. -- 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: FSF: Some Pentax A, FA, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc lenses and 1.7x AF Adapter
Ooo... Me! Possibly... Will send you a message off list. :) -c On Dec 2, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Miserere wrote: Wow, no bites at all? Now y'all are going to force me to go sell my wares at Pentax Forums :-\ By the way, anyone interested in a black 31 Ltd? Cheers, —M. \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment On 29 November 2013 20:10, Miserere wrote: > Pulled out a box from the closet and am doing some early Spring > Cleaning to get funds for upcoming purchases. Some of these are > difficult sales for me, but hopefully they'll go to a good home. > Scores are out of 10. > > Auto Focus: > > - FA 50mm f/1.4 - $225 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps. > > - FA 20mm f/2.8 - $625 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Caps. > > - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - $340 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps, hood. Hoya filter. > > - Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 - $250 > External: 9.7 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps (generic back), hood. Filter. > > - Pentax-F 1.7x AF "Fairydust" Adapter - $400 > External: 9.8 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Caps. SB80-80 pouch. > > - Sigma DG 70-300mm f/4-5.6 - $100 > External: 8.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps. Tiffen filter. > > - Tokina AT-X 400mm f/5.6 - $500 > External: 8.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back), tripod collar. Slide-out hood > > > Manual Focus: > > - Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 - $160 > External: 9.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original caps. > > - Vivitar PKA 24mm f/2 (made by Komine) - $200 > External: 9.5 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Caps. > > - Tokina PKA 28-70mm f/2.8-4.3 - $60 > External: 9.0 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back). > Photo: bit.ly/18cmL5y > > - Vivitar 135mm f/2.5 M42 (manufactured by Tokina) - $110 > External: 8.0 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back). > Photos: > * http://bit.ly/1ccMLSS > * http://bit.ly/1ccMMGx > > - Vivitar 70-150mm 2x Matched TC - $10 > No idea what to do with this, but if someone else does... It appears > to be new or almost. > > - Star-D PKA 28mm f/2.8 (focuses to 1:4) - $50 > It's in very good overall shape. > > > Other Stuff: > > - Pentax D-BG2 Grip (for K10D and K20D) - $60 > Condition: 9.5 > Includes: Original box, plastic pin cap. > > Shipping: > > In the US I'll use USPS Priority mail with tracking. If you buy more > than one lens then shipping per lens will be cheaper. > For outside the US I'll ship standard USPS. If you want something more > expensive, we can work it out if you're willing to pay for it. > > If anyone wants to make reasonable offers on these items cos they > don't think the prices are reasonable, go ahead. > > Cheers, > > > —M. > >\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com > >http://EnticingTheLight.com >A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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: FSF: Some Pentax A, FA, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc lenses and 1.7x AF Adapter
Wow, no bites at all? Now y'all are going to force me to go sell my wares at Pentax Forums :-\ By the way, anyone interested in a black 31 Ltd? Cheers, —M. \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment On 29 November 2013 20:10, Miserere wrote: > Pulled out a box from the closet and am doing some early Spring > Cleaning to get funds for upcoming purchases. Some of these are > difficult sales for me, but hopefully they'll go to a good home. > Scores are out of 10. > > Auto Focus: > > - FA 50mm f/1.4 - $225 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps. > > - FA 20mm f/2.8 - $625 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Caps. > > - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - $340 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps, hood. Hoya filter. > > - Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 - $250 > External: 9.7 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps (generic back), hood. Filter. > > - Pentax-F 1.7x AF "Fairydust" Adapter - $400 > External: 9.8 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Caps. SB80-80 pouch. > > - Sigma DG 70-300mm f/4-5.6 - $100 > External: 8.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps. Tiffen filter. > > - Tokina AT-X 400mm f/5.6 - $500 > External: 8.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back), tripod collar. Slide-out hood > > > Manual Focus: > > - Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 - $160 > External: 9.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original caps. > > - Vivitar PKA 24mm f/2 (made by Komine) - $200 > External: 9.5 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Caps. > > - Tokina PKA 28-70mm f/2.8-4.3 - $60 > External: 9.0 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back). > Photo: bit.ly/18cmL5y > > - Vivitar 135mm f/2.5 M42 (manufactured by Tokina) - $110 > External: 8.0 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back). > Photos: > * http://bit.ly/1ccMLSS > * http://bit.ly/1ccMMGx > > - Vivitar 70-150mm 2x Matched TC - $10 > No idea what to do with this, but if someone else does... It appears > to be new or almost. > > - Star-D PKA 28mm f/2.8 (focuses to 1:4) - $50 > It's in very good overall shape. > > > Other Stuff: > > - Pentax D-BG2 Grip (for K10D and K20D) - $60 > Condition: 9.5 > Includes: Original box, plastic pin cap. > > Shipping: > > In the US I'll use USPS Priority mail with tracking. If you buy more > than one lens then shipping per lens will be cheaper. > For outside the US I'll ship standard USPS. If you want something more > expensive, we can work it out if you're willing to pay for it. > > If anyone wants to make reasonable offers on these items cos they > don't think the prices are reasonable, go ahead. > > Cheers, > > >—M. > > \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com > > http://EnticingTheLight.com > A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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: FSF: Some Pentax A, FA, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc lenses and 1.7x AF Adapter
Embarrassingly, I briefly lost my FA 20mm f/2.8 this afternoon. Now that I've found it again, I'm downgrading its external condition to an 8 due to some scuffs on the barrel; nothing that affects its physical integrity. Front cap is original Pentax, rear cap generic. I also have (and always have had) a 67mm filter on it. Needless to say, all lenses are free of fungus and have oil-free snappy blades. If you're not happy with your purchase, you have 10 days to return it to me for a refund (minus shipping costs). Cheers, —M. \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment On 29 November 2013 20:10, Miserere wrote: > Pulled out a box from the closet and am doing some early Spring > Cleaning to get funds for upcoming purchases. Some of these are > difficult sales for me, but hopefully they'll go to a good home. > Scores are out of 10. > > Auto Focus: > > - FA 50mm f/1.4 - $225 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps. > > - FA 20mm f/2.8 - $625 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Caps. > > - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - $340 > External: 9 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps, hood. Hoya filter. > > - Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 - $250 > External: 9.7 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps (generic back), hood. Filter. > > - Pentax-F 1.7x AF "Fairydust" Adapter - $400 > External: 9.8 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Caps. SB80-80 pouch. > > - Sigma DG 70-300mm f/4-5.6 - $100 > External: 8.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original box, caps. Tiffen filter. > > - Tokina AT-X 400mm f/5.6 - $500 > External: 8.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back), tripod collar. Slide-out hood > > > Manual Focus: > > - Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 - $160 > External: 9.5 > Optics: 9.9 > Includes: Original caps. > > - Vivitar PKA 24mm f/2 (made by Komine) - $200 > External: 9.5 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Caps. > > - Tokina PKA 28-70mm f/2.8-4.3 - $60 > External: 9.0 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back). > Photo: bit.ly/18cmL5y > > - Vivitar 135mm f/2.5 M42 (manufactured by Tokina) - $110 > External: 8.0 > Optics: 9.5 > Includes: Original front cap (generic back). > Photos: > * http://bit.ly/1ccMLSS > * http://bit.ly/1ccMMGx > > - Vivitar 70-150mm 2x Matched TC - $10 > No idea what to do with this, but if someone else does... It appears > to be new or almost. > > - Star-D PKA 28mm f/2.8 (focuses to 1:4) - $50 > It's in very good overall shape. > > > Other Stuff: > > - Pentax D-BG2 Grip (for K10D and K20D) - $60 > Condition: 9.5 > Includes: Original box, plastic pin cap. > > Shipping: > > In the US I'll use USPS Priority mail with tracking. If you buy more > than one lens then shipping per lens will be cheaper. > For outside the US I'll ship standard USPS. If you want something more > expensive, we can work it out if you're willing to pay for it. > > If anyone wants to make reasonable offers on these items cos they > don't think the prices are reasonable, go ahead. > > Cheers, > > >—M. > > \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com > > http://EnticingTheLight.com > A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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.
FSF: Some Pentax A, FA, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc lenses and 1.7x AF Adapter
Pulled out a box from the closet and am doing some early Spring Cleaning to get funds for upcoming purchases. Some of these are difficult sales for me, but hopefully they'll go to a good home. Scores are out of 10. Auto Focus: - FA 50mm f/1.4 - $225 External: 9 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Original box, caps. - FA 20mm f/2.8 - $625 External: 9 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Caps. - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - $340 External: 9 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Original box, caps, hood. Hoya filter. - Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 - $250 External: 9.7 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Original box, caps (generic back), hood. Filter. - Pentax-F 1.7x AF "Fairydust" Adapter - $400 External: 9.8 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Caps. SB80-80 pouch. - Sigma DG 70-300mm f/4-5.6 - $100 External: 8.5 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Original box, caps. Tiffen filter. - Tokina AT-X 400mm f/5.6 - $500 External: 8.5 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Original front cap (generic back), tripod collar. Slide-out hood Manual Focus: - Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 - $160 External: 9.5 Optics: 9.9 Includes: Original caps. - Vivitar PKA 24mm f/2 (made by Komine) - $200 External: 9.5 Optics: 9.5 Includes: Caps. - Tokina PKA 28-70mm f/2.8-4.3 - $60 External: 9.0 Optics: 9.5 Includes: Original front cap (generic back). Photo: bit.ly/18cmL5y - Vivitar 135mm f/2.5 M42 (manufactured by Tokina) - $110 External: 8.0 Optics: 9.5 Includes: Original front cap (generic back). Photos: * http://bit.ly/1ccMLSS * http://bit.ly/1ccMMGx - Vivitar 70-150mm 2x Matched TC - $10 No idea what to do with this, but if someone else does... It appears to be new or almost. - Star-D PKA 28mm f/2.8 (focuses to 1:4) - $50 It's in very good overall shape. Other Stuff: - Pentax D-BG2 Grip (for K10D and K20D) - $60 Condition: 9.5 Includes: Original box, plastic pin cap. Shipping: In the US I'll use USPS Priority mail with tracking. If you buy more than one lens then shipping per lens will be cheaper. For outside the US I'll ship standard USPS. If you want something more expensive, we can work it out if you're willing to pay for it. If anyone wants to make reasonable offers on these items cos they don't think the prices are reasonable, go ahead. Cheers, —M. \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
well, when I get the beast the one sure way to check is to try to mount it on my K-1000 :-) ann On 7/19/2013 23:24, John wrote: On 7/19/2013 5:57 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: that won't be happening - (friend taking picture) I'll just have to wait to get it in person Intereasting, though - in the photos for the Pentax K there is no red dot. - all the lenses I have have them. ann Looks like it's an 'A' lens that's not locked in the 'A' position. The red dot is there on the side of the bayonet. If you follow the vertical side of the letter 'P', you can just barely see it (or its reflection) right under the edge of the flange. On 7/19/2013 17:12, Darren Addy wrote: Identification (if he can take a decent picture of the mount) http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-1.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-2.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-3.html On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Thanks JOhn... that was what I wondered. I'd have no way to test it before selling unless I could put it on one of my bodies, or pay to have it tested at Photo-tech. ann On 7/19/2013 14:49, John Francis wrote: On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:36:55PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: On 7/19/2013 12:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things , and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting or are there several? I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. ann Every K-mount Tokina lens I've had, the red dot on the rear flange was in the right place. That's not the question Ann had, though. My Olympus 4/3 lenses have a bayonet mount, and a red dot for positioning. I would not be at all surprised to find that there are other systems that also have red dots, so even though the Tokina 28-810 lens has a bayonet mount and a red dot there is no guarantee that it is, in fact, a K-mount. -- 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
On 7/19/2013 5:57 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: that won't be happening - (friend taking picture) I'll just have to wait to get it in person Intereasting, though - in the photos for the Pentax K there is no red dot. - all the lenses I have have them. ann Looks like it's an 'A' lens that's not locked in the 'A' position. The red dot is there on the side of the bayonet. If you follow the vertical side of the letter 'P', you can just barely see it (or its reflection) right under the edge of the flange. On 7/19/2013 17:12, Darren Addy wrote: Identification (if he can take a decent picture of the mount) http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-1.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-2.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-3.html On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Thanks JOhn... that was what I wondered. I'd have no way to test it before selling unless I could put it on one of my bodies, or pay to have it tested at Photo-tech. ann On 7/19/2013 14:49, John Francis wrote: On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:36:55PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: On 7/19/2013 12:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things , and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting or are there several? I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. ann Every K-mount Tokina lens I've had, the red dot on the rear flange was in the right place. That's not the question Ann had, though. My Olympus 4/3 lenses have a bayonet mount, and a red dot for positioning. I would not be at all surprised to find that there are other systems that also have red dots, so even though the Tokina 28-810 lens has a bayonet mount and a red dot there is no guarantee that it is, in fact, a K-mount. -- 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
Identification (if he can take a decent picture of the mount) http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-1.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-2.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-3.html On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: > Thanks JOhn... that was what I wondered. I'd have no way to test it before > selling unless I could put it on one of my bodies, or pay to have it tested > at Photo-tech. > > ann > > > On 7/19/2013 14:49, John Francis wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:36:55PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: >>> >>> On 7/19/2013 12:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 >>>> zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things >>>> , and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear >>>> element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax >>>> is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting >>>> or are there several? >>>> >>>> I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured >>>> Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. >>>> >>>> ann >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Every K-mount Tokina lens I've had, the red dot on the rear flange >>> was in the right place. >> >> >> That's not the question Ann had, though. >> >> My Olympus 4/3 lenses have a bayonet mount, and a red dot for positioning. >> >> I would not be at all surprised to find that there are other systems that >> also have red dots, so even though the Tokina 28-810 lens has a bayonet >> mount and a red dot there is no guarantee that it is, in fact, a K-mount. >> >> > > -- > 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
that won't be happening - (friend taking picture) I'll just have to wait to get it in person Intereasting, though - in the photos for the Pentax K there is no red dot. - all the lenses I have have them. ann On 7/19/2013 17:12, Darren Addy wrote: Identification (if he can take a decent picture of the mount) http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-1.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-2.html http://www.kehblog.com/2011/12/lens-mount-guide-part-3.html On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Thanks JOhn... that was what I wondered. I'd have no way to test it before selling unless I could put it on one of my bodies, or pay to have it tested at Photo-tech. ann On 7/19/2013 14:49, John Francis wrote: On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:36:55PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: On 7/19/2013 12:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things , and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting or are there several? I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. ann Every K-mount Tokina lens I've had, the red dot on the rear flange was in the right place. That's not the question Ann had, though. My Olympus 4/3 lenses have a bayonet mount, and a red dot for positioning. I would not be at all surprised to find that there are other systems that also have red dots, so even though the Tokina 28-810 lens has a bayonet mount and a red dot there is no guarantee that it is, in fact, a K-mount. -- 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
Thanks JOhn... that was what I wondered. I'd have no way to test it before selling unless I could put it on one of my bodies, or pay to have it tested at Photo-tech. ann On 7/19/2013 14:49, John Francis wrote: On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:36:55PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: On 7/19/2013 12:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things , and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting or are there several? I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. ann Every K-mount Tokina lens I've had, the red dot on the rear flange was in the right place. That's not the question Ann had, though. My Olympus 4/3 lenses have a bayonet mount, and a red dot for positioning. I would not be at all surprised to find that there are other systems that also have red dots, so even though the Tokina 28-810 lens has a bayonet mount and a red dot there is no guarantee that it is, in fact, a K-mount. -- 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
My 28-80 2.8 Tokina zoom is built like a tank and is better with film than with digital. The zooms that really seem to have gone up in quality (optical and build) are the Sigmas and Tamrons, IMO. Since the Tokina is a gift, that trumps paying for a Pentax, Tamron, or Sigma. :-) Jeffery On Jul 19, 2013, at 11:59 AM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: > > the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 zoom > which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things , and is > away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear element had a red > dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax > is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting > or are there several? > > I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured > Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. > > ann > > > -- > 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 01:36:55PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: > On 7/19/2013 12:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: > > > >the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 > >zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things > >, and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear > >element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax > >is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting > >or are there several? > > > >I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured > >Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. > > > >ann > > > > > > Every K-mount Tokina lens I've had, the red dot on the rear flange > was in the right place. That's not the question Ann had, though. My Olympus 4/3 lenses have a bayonet mount, and a red dot for positioning. I would not be at all surprised to find that there are other systems that also have red dots, so even though the Tokina 28-810 lens has a bayonet mount and a red dot there is no guarantee that it is, in fact, a K-mount. -- 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.
Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things , and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting or are there several? I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. ann -- 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: Question about Tokina Zoom 28-210 vis a vis Pentax
On 7/19/2013 12:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: the friend whose wedding I'm shooting ended up acquiring a Tokina 28-210 zoom which he intentds to give me... He knows nothing about such things , and is away from home now, but it is a bayonet mount and the rear element had a red dot on it. What I don't remember is if Pentax is the only SLR with clue to positioning the lens to body for mounting or are there several? I didn't see it, this was me asking questions over phone but I figured Bayonet mount, good zoom - worth checking out more anyway. ann Every K-mount Tokina lens I've had, the red dot on the rear flange was in the right place. -- 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: Perspectives on Tokina AT-X 400/5.6 & Pentax M* 300/4
I have both the Tokina ATX and the A* 300mm f4 (not the M* but I think the lenses are the same optical formula.) Hands down, I would take the Tokina over the A*. I have toted my A* around for over a decade and have barely used it. It is certainly an above average lens, but not on par with some of the truly excellent star series lenses. I have found the Tokina to be pretty good, especially at f8. It does get soft at f 5.6. I searched high and low for the Tokina about a year after it was discontinued, IIRC in the late 90's, and ultimately bought a Sigma 400mm f5.6. I later swapped that lens for the Tokina and a bit of cash. I think I paid about $650 for the Tokina then. My original sample got the fungus. I looked for a replacement for several months and got a SIgma 135 - 400 when I could not find one. Later I bought a replacement Tokina off ebay last year (or maybe the year before) for about $400. The SIgma zoom is a nice lens at 400, but not on par with the Tokina. The SIgma 400 f5.6 macro was probably a better lens than the Tokina 400mm. I recall someone here on the list noting that the Sigma was sharper than the Tokian at 5.6, but the Tokina surpassed the Sigma at f8. Not sure if that is true but at the time I did not understand how important it is for a telephoto to be very sharp wide open. I have several shots with the Tokina on my website - http://www.markcassino.com/b2evolution/index.php/spotted-sandpiper http://www.markcassino.com/b2evolution/index.php/white_throated_sparrow http://www.markcassino.com/b2evolution/index.php/of-finches-and-thistle The goldfinch shots were taken with the fungus-clouded lens. Overall, I've found the Tokina to be a great lens. The biggest drawback is that it lulls you into shooting without a Tripod (too small and light) and images suffer from that. Even with AS, you need a tripod for telephoto work. Ahd like I said - I almost never use the A* 300mm f4. Just too short, focuses too far away, and not so hot optically. I had hopes that using it with the Q would finally be a nice for the 300mm, but my recent tests have not born that out. Mark On 9/21/2012 11:00 AM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com/2012/09/perspectives-on-tokina-at-x-40056-af-v.html Not a thorough comparison, but enough to display strong points of both. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" -- Jim Elliott -- 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: Perspectives on Tokina AT-X 400/5.6 & Pentax M* 300/4
The 300mm f4 M series lens is rather rare. The 300mm f4 A lens is identical and more available.. I often take the 300/4 A with the AF1.7X on trips. It makes a sharp and small birding combo. Regards, Bob S. On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com/2012/09/perspectives-on-tokina-at-x-40056-af-v.html > > Not a thorough comparison, but enough to display strong points of both. > > Sincerely, > > Collin Brendemuehl > "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" > -- Jim Elliott > > > > > > > -- > 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.
Perspectives on Tokina AT-X 400/5.6 & Pentax M* 300/4
http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com/2012/09/perspectives-on-tokina-at-x-40056-af-v.html Not a thorough comparison, but enough to display strong points of both. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" -- Jim Elliott -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 5, 2012, at 4:24 AM, Rick Womer wrote: > Larry, > > Au contraire; I usually set clarity to 15-20. I find I'm using less in LR4 > than I did in previous versions. HAR! > > Rick > > http://photo.net/photos/RickW > > > - Original Message - > From: Larry Colen > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2012 11:09 PM > Subject: Re: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise > > > On Sep 4, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > >> Larry, some of these are so noisy that I need ear plugs to look at them. > > Mark! > >> >> The "clarity" thing is a bit overdone, I think. > > > Either the clarity, or the shooting at ISO 20K. Or, all of the above. I > certainly don't think that dialing clarity up to 11 should be my standard > procedure. I think that it does have some potential use. I'm just trying to > figure out when and how. It sounds to me that you don't think it ever works. > >> >> Compositionally, though, they're great. > > Thanks. > > -- > Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est > > > > > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
Larry, Au contraire; I usually set clarity to 15-20. I find I'm using less in LR4 than I did in previous versions. Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW - Original Message - From: Larry Colen To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Cc: Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2012 11:09 PM Subject: Re: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise On Sep 4, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > Larry, some of these are so noisy that I need ear plugs to look at them. Mark! > > The "clarity" thing is a bit overdone, I think. Either the clarity, or the shooting at ISO 20K. Or, all of the above. I certainly don't think that dialing clarity up to 11 should be my standard procedure. I think that it does have some potential use. I'm just trying to figure out when and how. It sounds to me that you don't think it ever works. > > Compositionally, though, they're great. Thanks. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 4, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > Larry, some of these are so noisy that I need ear plugs to look at them. Mark! > > The "clarity" thing is a bit overdone, I think. Either the clarity, or the shooting at ISO 20K. Or, all of the above. I certainly don't think that dialing clarity up to 11 should be my standard procedure. I think that it does have some potential use. I'm just trying to figure out when and how. It sounds to me that you don't think it ever works. > > Compositionally, though, they're great. Thanks. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
I think that I tend to look at little Pentax lenses, which they are good at. Really, though, I've seen some good images from that DA40 XS. Paper thin and cheap, too? I hope they make a smaller camera to put it on. Really, Sony NEXs are tiny bodies with lenses like logs, and Pentax makes a brick with a lens like a slice of salami. On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM, John Sessoms wrote: > From: Steven Desjardins > > >> OT, but I went to B&H to look at that $1/gm idea. I noticed however, >> that the DA 40 XS and the DA 50 1.8 are both about $250, which is >> really cheap. They also ruin the $1/gm ratio. > > > Do you reckon that means B&H's prices are too low, or does it suggest eBay > prices might be too high? > > > -- > 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
From: Steven Desjardins OT, but I went to B&H to look at that $1/gm idea. I noticed however, that the DA 40 XS and the DA 50 1.8 are both about $250, which is really cheap. They also ruin the $1/gm ratio. Do you reckon that means B&H's prices are too low, or does it suggest eBay prices might be too high? -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
Larry, some of these are so noisy that I need ear plugs to look at them. The "clarity" thing is a bit overdone, I think. Compositionally, though, they're great. Cheers, Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW - Original Message - From: Larry Colen To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Cc: Sent: Sunday, September 2, 2012 8:08 PM Subject: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise I had been having some mixed feelings about my Tokina 80-200/2.8. It seemed like I just couldn't get sharp photos with it. Last night, some friends were playing at the Trout Farm up in Zayante, and I decided to get a little more practice with it. Since I did manage to get a few shots, that actually were sharp, even wide open, I realized that the lack of sharpness isn't entirely the lenses fault. Big surprise, that I'm the limiting factor in the sharpness of my photos. After reading the article on sharpness in TOP, I think that a lot of my perception of lack of sharpness is actually lack of contrast. I think that other things also come into play, such as the difficulty of manually focusing on moving subjects in low light. Even with a split prism focusing screen. For that matter, even with live view it is difficult when the subjects move faster than the latency of the image. If I actually had money to buy glass, I'd be very tempted to look for the autofocus version of this lens, not only would it make focusing easier in many cases, but the shake reduction would work a lot better too. While f/2.8 is as fast as a zoom lens gets, I certainly notice it being a lot slower than my primes. There were several times last night, on TAv mode where the ISO went all the way up to 25,600. Things also might have been a bit sharper if I hadn't left my ball head at home and could have used my monopod. The other thing that I've been playing with is my post processing trick of dialing up clarity all of the way, up to the point that it nearly looks like over done HDR, but with a lot more noise. Interestingly, I think that when I use this trick the photos work best when they are actually just a bit soft to start with. I'm guessing that this is because the clarity slider does something not entirely unlike sharpening, so if I under sharpen first, then they don't look quite so oversharpened afterwards. For them that care, I put the 24 best up on flickr, here they are with the fluidr front end so you can see the exposure data: http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157631375658366/ Interestingly, 20120901-LRC70488.jpg was something like five stops underexposed. I'm not sure how. I normally shot the drummer at something like 1/40 f/2.8 ISO 1, and it was shot at 1/125 f/5 ISO 125. It's a bit rough, but still a testament to capabilities of the K-5 that I was able to get it that good. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
OT, but I went to B&H to look at that $1/gm idea. I noticed however, that the DA 40 XS and the DA 50 1.8 are both about $250, which is really cheap. They also ruin the $1/gm ratio. On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote: > $1/gm for a lens? (ROTFL) > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> >> On Sep 4, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Darren Addy wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sep 4, 2012, at 1:41 PM, John Francis wrote: >>>>> Use my FA* 80-200/2.8 one week, and see if that makes any difference. >>>> >>>> There are two problems with that: >>>> >>>> 1) The FA* 80-200 probably weighs twice what the Tokina does. >>> >>> I just weighed my Tokina 828 and without the metal hood (with caps and >>> polarizer) it weighs 1469 grams. >>> The FA* 80-200 specs at 1510 grams. >>> >>> I think I just eliminated at least one problem for you. >> >> My bathroom scale only has resolution of 100g or .2 lb. My Tokina weighs >> 2.4 pounds, or about 1100 grams. >> >> I borrowed the FA* for a while one day, and after a while walking around the >> beach with it, that sucker got heavy! >> >> That's not to say that I wouldn't love to have one, I'm a sucker for fast >> glass. However the two I found on ebay's completed listings went for >> slightly less then $1/gm. John's one hell of a nice guy, but I expect that >> I'd have a lot better luck asking him to borrow it if I desperately needed >> it for a particular shoot than asking him to discount to anything that I >> could even pretend to be able to afford. >> -- >> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
$1/gm for a lens? (ROTFL) On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > On Sep 4, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 4, 2012, at 1:41 PM, John Francis wrote: >>>> Use my FA* 80-200/2.8 one week, and see if that makes any difference. >>> >>> There are two problems with that: >>> >>> 1) The FA* 80-200 probably weighs twice what the Tokina does. >> >> I just weighed my Tokina 828 and without the metal hood (with caps and >> polarizer) it weighs 1469 grams. >> The FA* 80-200 specs at 1510 grams. >> >> I think I just eliminated at least one problem for you. > > My bathroom scale only has resolution of 100g or .2 lb. My Tokina weighs 2.4 > pounds, or about 1100 grams. > > I borrowed the FA* for a while one day, and after a while walking around the > beach with it, that sucker got heavy! > > That's not to say that I wouldn't love to have one, I'm a sucker for fast > glass. However the two I found on ebay's completed listings went for > slightly less then $1/gm. John's one hell of a nice guy, but I expect that > I'd have a lot better luck asking him to borrow it if I desperately needed it > for a particular shoot than asking him to discount to anything that I could > even pretend to be able to afford. > -- > Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est > > > > > > -- > 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 4, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> >> On Sep 4, 2012, at 1:41 PM, John Francis wrote: >>> Use my FA* 80-200/2.8 one week, and see if that makes any difference. >> >> There are two problems with that: >> >> 1) The FA* 80-200 probably weighs twice what the Tokina does. > > I just weighed my Tokina 828 and without the metal hood (with caps and > polarizer) it weighs 1469 grams. > The FA* 80-200 specs at 1510 grams. > > I think I just eliminated at least one problem for you. My bathroom scale only has resolution of 100g or .2 lb. My Tokina weighs 2.4 pounds, or about 1100 grams. I borrowed the FA* for a while one day, and after a while walking around the beach with it, that sucker got heavy! That's not to say that I wouldn't love to have one, I'm a sucker for fast glass. However the two I found on ebay's completed listings went for slightly less then $1/gm. John's one hell of a nice guy, but I expect that I'd have a lot better luck asking him to borrow it if I desperately needed it for a particular shoot than asking him to discount to anything that I could even pretend to be able to afford. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > On Sep 4, 2012, at 1:41 PM, John Francis wrote: >> Use my FA* 80-200/2.8 one week, and see if that makes any difference. > > There are two problems with that: > > 1) The FA* 80-200 probably weighs twice what the Tokina does. I just weighed my Tokina 828 and without the metal hood (with caps and polarizer) it weighs 1469 grams. The FA* 80-200 specs at 1510 grams. I think I just eliminated at least one problem for you. -D -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 4, 2012, at 1:41 PM, John Francis wrote: > On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 05:08:39PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote: >> I had been having some mixed feelings about my Tokina 80-200/2.8 > > Well, there's a pretty easy way to see how well the lens is working. > > Use my FA* 80-200/2.8 one week, and see if that makes any difference. There are two problems with that: 1) The FA* 80-200 probably weighs twice what the Tokina does. 2) At the end of the week, I'd be asking you how much you'd want for the FA*, and I can't afford to adopt another one of your old lenses right now. > -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 05:08:39PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote: > I had been having some mixed feelings about my Tokina 80-200/2.8 Well, there's a pretty easy way to see how well the lens is working. Use my FA* 80-200/2.8 one week, and see if that makes any difference. -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 4, 2012, at 5:03 AM, Larry Colen wrote: > I think the skill is in the taking the photos, the art is in throwing most of > them away. Mark... Dave -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 3, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > Just in case you didn't catch it, - I was just joking about the framing > of the shot (which appeared .. ghm.. rather strange to me). No, I didn't catch it. And yes, the framing is rather strange. It was one of those mistakes that struck me as oddly appealing. > -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
Mon Sep 3 12:55:56 EDT 2012 Larry Colen wrote: > On Sep 3, 2012, at 7:38 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > > > > Larry, > > > > It looks like 70365 is back-focused: > > http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/7917602758/ > > > > ;-) > > > > (or is it focused on the back?) > > I think that it is front focused on the back of his shoulder. One of > the problems of the small screen on the cameras is that photos which are > only slightly mis focused look sharp when you check them on the screen. > Judging by the number of photos that were front focused by a few inches, > what I think I did on those were was use live view to focus, then move > the camera back to my face, rather than moving my face up to the camera. > Another reason I would have done better with the monopod. > Just in case you didn't catch it, - I was just joking about the framing of the shot (which appeared .. ghm.. rather strange to me). Igor -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 3, 2012, at 7:52 AM, Steven Desjardins wrote: > Among the things I hate about you Larry is that your lousy shots look > so good. It's a nice set. There is a definite art to making photos > taken under bad conditions into something that is pleasing to the eye. Thank you Steven. I think the skill is in the taking the photos, the art is in throwing most of them away. The trick that I'm playing with the clarity slider sort of reminds me of when we discovered solarizing prints as kids. Someone accidentally exposed a print that was still developing to light, and the results were pretty cool. I had that one shot last month that was really nice, except for being totally out of focus, and screwing around with it I noticed how pushing the clarity past the reasonable point led to some nice results. One of these days, I need to spend a little more time photographing in decent light. Unfortunately, then I won't have an excuse for crappy image quality. > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote: >> >> Larry, >> >> It looks like 70365 is back-focused: >> http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/7917602758/ >> >> ;-) >> >> (or is it focused on the back?) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Igor >> >> >> >> -- >> 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 3, 2012, at 7:38 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > Larry, > > It looks like 70365 is back-focused: > http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/7917602758/ > > ;-) > > (or is it focused on the back?) I think that it is front focused on the back of his shoulder. One of the problems of the small screen on the cameras is that photos which are only slightly mis focused look sharp when you check them on the screen. Judging by the number of photos that were front focused by a few inches, what I think I did on those were was use live view to focus, then move the camera back to my face, rather than moving my face up to the camera. Another reason I would have done better with the monopod. > > Cheers, > > Igor > > > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
On Sep 2, 2012, at 5:59 PM, jn289 wrote: > Larry, They are nice, but I like the fourth one down (20120901-LRC70339.jpg) > the best. Just something in the lighting and the sparkle in his eye Thanks Joe. > > >> I had been having some mixed feelings about my Tokina 80-200/2.8. It seemed >> like I just couldn't get sharp photos with it. Last night, some friends >> were playing at the Trout Farm up in Zayante, and I decided to get a little >> more practice with it. Since I did manage to get a few shots, that actually >> were sharp, even wide open, I realized that the lack of sharpness isn't >> entirely the lenses fault. Big surprise, that I'm the limiting factor in >> the sharpness of my photos. >> After reading the article on sharpness in TOP, I think that a lot of my >> perception of lack of sharpness is actually lack of contrast. I think that >> other things also come into play, such as the difficulty of manually >> focusing on moving subjects in low light. Even with a split prism focusing >> screen. For that matter, even with live view it is difficult when the >> subjects move faster than the latency of the image. If I actually had money >> to buy glass, I'd be very tempted to look for the autofocus version of this >> lens, not only would it make focusing easier in many cases, but the shake >> reduction would work a lot better too. >> >> While f/2.8 is as fast as a zoom lens gets, I certainly notice it being a >> lot slower than my primes. There were several times last night, on TAv mode >> where the ISO went all the way up to 25,600. >> >> Things also might have been a bit sharper if I hadn't left my ball head at >> home and could have used my monopod. >> >> The other thing that I've been playing with is my post processing trick of >> dialing up clarity all of the way, up to the point that it nearly looks like >> over done HDR, but with a lot more noise. Interestingly, I think that when I >> use this trick the photos work best when they are actually just a bit soft >> to start with. I'm guessing that this is because the clarity slider does >> something not entirely unlike sharpening, so if I under sharpen first, then >> they don't look quite so oversharpened afterwards. >> >> For them that care, I put the 24 best up on flickr, here they are with the >> fluidr front end so you can see the exposure data: >> http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157631375658366/ >> >> Interestingly, 20120901-LRC70488.jpg was something like five stops >> underexposed. I'm not sure how. I normally shot the drummer at something >> like 1/40 f/2.8 ISO 1, and it was shot at 1/125 f/5 ISO 125. It's a bit >> rough, but still a testament to capabilities of the K-5 that I was able to >> get it that good. >> >> -- >> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
Among the things I hate about you Larry is that your lousy shots look so good. It's a nice set. There is a definite art to making photos taken under bad conditions into something that is pleasing to the eye. On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > Larry, > > It looks like 70365 is back-focused: > http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/7917602758/ > > ;-) > > (or is it focused on the back?) > > Cheers, > > Igor > > > > -- > 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
Larry, It looks like 70365 is back-focused: http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/7917602758/ ;-) (or is it focused on the back?) Cheers, Igor -- 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: Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
Larry, They are nice, but I like the fourth one down (20120901-LRC70339.jpg) the best. Just something in the lighting and the sparkle in his eye I had been having some mixed feelings about my Tokina 80-200/2.8. It seemed like I just couldn't get sharp photos with it. Last night, some friends were playing at the Trout Farm up in Zayante, and I decided to get a little more practice with it. Since I did manage to get a few shots, that actually were sharp, even wide open, I realized that the lack of sharpness isn't entirely the lenses fault. Big surprise, that I'm the limiting factor in the sharpness of my photos. After reading the article on sharpness in TOP, I think that a lot of my perception of lack of sharpness is actually lack of contrast. I think that other things also come into play, such as the difficulty of manually focusing on moving subjects in low light. Even with a split prism focusing screen. For that matter, even with live view it is difficult when the subjects move faster than the latency of the image. If I actually had money to buy glass, I'd be very tempted to look for the autofocus version of this lens, not only would it make focusing easier in many cases, but the shake reduction would work a lot better too. While f/2.8 is as fast as a zoom lens gets, I certainly notice it being a lot slower than my primes. There were several times last night, on TAv mode where the ISO went all the way up to 25,600. Things also might have been a bit sharper if I hadn't left my ball head at home and could have used my monopod. The other thing that I've been playing with is my post processing trick of dialing up clarity all of the way, up to the point that it nearly looks like over done HDR, but with a lot more noise. Interestingly, I think that when I use this trick the photos work best when they are actually just a bit soft to start with. I'm guessing that this is because the clarity slider does something not entirely unlike sharpening, so if I under sharpen first, then they don't look quite so oversharpened afterwards. For them that care, I put the 24 best up on flickr, here they are with the fluidr front end so you can see the exposure data: http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157631375658366/ Interestingly, 20120901-LRC70488.jpg was something like five stops underexposed. I'm not sure how. I normally shot the drummer at something like 1/40 f/2.8 ISO 1, and it was shot at 1/125 f/5 ISO 125. It's a bit rough, but still a testament to capabilities of the K-5 that I was able to get it that good. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Taking the Tokina out for some exercise
I had been having some mixed feelings about my Tokina 80-200/2.8. It seemed like I just couldn't get sharp photos with it. Last night, some friends were playing at the Trout Farm up in Zayante, and I decided to get a little more practice with it. Since I did manage to get a few shots, that actually were sharp, even wide open, I realized that the lack of sharpness isn't entirely the lenses fault. Big surprise, that I'm the limiting factor in the sharpness of my photos. After reading the article on sharpness in TOP, I think that a lot of my perception of lack of sharpness is actually lack of contrast. I think that other things also come into play, such as the difficulty of manually focusing on moving subjects in low light. Even with a split prism focusing screen. For that matter, even with live view it is difficult when the subjects move faster than the latency of the image. If I actually had money to buy glass, I'd be very tempted to look for the autofocus version of this lens, not only would it make focusing easier in many cases, but the shake reduction would work a lot better too. While f/2.8 is as fast as a zoom lens gets, I certainly notice it being a lot slower than my primes. There were several times last night, on TAv mode where the ISO went all the way up to 25,600. Things also might have been a bit sharper if I hadn't left my ball head at home and could have used my monopod. The other thing that I've been playing with is my post processing trick of dialing up clarity all of the way, up to the point that it nearly looks like over done HDR, but with a lot more noise. Interestingly, I think that when I use this trick the photos work best when they are actually just a bit soft to start with. I'm guessing that this is because the clarity slider does something not entirely unlike sharpening, so if I under sharpen first, then they don't look quite so oversharpened afterwards. For them that care, I put the 24 best up on flickr, here they are with the fluidr front end so you can see the exposure data: http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157631375658366/ Interestingly, 20120901-LRC70488.jpg was something like five stops underexposed. I'm not sure how. I normally shot the drummer at something like 1/40 f/2.8 ISO 1, and it was shot at 1/125 f/5 ISO 125. It's a bit rough, but still a testament to capabilities of the K-5 that I was able to get it that good. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO 80-200mm f/2.8 question
Yes, there is no problem with this lens reporting the proper focal length in EXIF. My "shake reduction" question was the result of an unfortunate leap in logic. I think I'm going to like this lens. -- 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: Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO 80-200mm f/2.8 question
From: John Francis On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 02:30:57PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: From: Darren Addy I'm curious... if it shows up in Photoshop as a Pentax-F 35-105mm, does that mean that it is also misreading the focal length that this lens is set at (when doing image stabilization)? If it is doing image stabilization for a 105mm focal length when the lens is set to 200mm, that could definitely lead to some lack of sharpness. I think I will see if I get better results with Image Stabilization off and tripod mount it (which I guess I should be doing to test for sharpness anyway!). I don't know. I think the camera just has to have some kind of a code to bury in the EXIF to identify the lens & it uses the code that PhotoShop thinks is the Pentax-F 35-105. Don't blame the camera - it just reports the code it gets from the lens. Some manufacturers (most notably Sigma) didn't request a code from Pentax (presumably because there was a cost involved), so just used the same code for multiple lenses (usually one that corresponded to a Pentax lens that was similar to the first lens). I'm a little surprised to see that Tokina did this - they used to be a Pentax partner, so I'd expect them to get it right). As for the original query: it should be pretty easy to confirm that the reported focal length is correct - that information is also in the EXIF. When I mount this on my K20D, it shows the correct focal length in the image information when I review images on the LCD. -- 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: Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO 80-200mm f/2.8 question
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 02:30:57PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: > From: Darren Addy > > >I'm curious... if it shows up in Photoshop as a Pentax-F 35-105mm, > >does that mean that it is also misreading the focal length that this > >lens is set at (when doing image stabilization)? > >If it is doing image stabilization for a 105mm focal length when the > >lens is set to 200mm, that could definitely lead to some lack of > >sharpness. I think I will see if I get better results with Image > >Stabilization off and tripod mount it (which I guess I should be doing > >to test for sharpness anyway!). > > I don't know. > > I think the camera just has to have some kind of a code to bury in > the EXIF to identify the lens & it uses the code that PhotoShop > thinks is the Pentax-F 35-105. Don't blame the camera - it just reports the code it gets from the lens. Some manufacturers (most notably Sigma) didn't request a code from Pentax (presumably because there was a cost involved), so just used the same code for multiple lenses (usually one that corresponded to a Pentax lens that was similar to the first lens). I'm a little surprised to see that Tokina did this - they used to be a Pentax partner, so I'd expect them to get it right). As for the original query: it should be pretty easy to confirm that the reported focal length is correct - that information is also in the EXIF. -- 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: Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO 80-200mm f/2.8 question
The camera uses the code recorded in the data chip in the lens. Having partially disassembled an FA and an F lens I can say with relative assurance that that focal length is reported by several conductive strips that are sampled differently as the zoom ring is turned. I expect that the reported focal length is most likely correct. The Acontacts tell the camera the absolute maximum and minimum apertures the lens is capable of, (as per Boz K mount description page). Now I don't know how the following is done, but based on behavior I'd say the lens' on board chip sends a modification signal to the camera body based on the focal length selected so the camera will display and record the correct f stop. This doesn't happen with A zoom lenses since they have no chip. On 5/25/2012 2:30 PM, John Sessoms wrote: From: Darren Addy I'm curious... if it shows up in Photoshop as a Pentax-F 35-105mm, does that mean that it is also misreading the focal length that this lens is set at (when doing image stabilization)? If it is doing image stabilization for a 105mm focal length when the lens is set to 200mm, that could definitely lead to some lack of sharpness. I think I will see if I get better results with Image Stabilization off and tripod mount it (which I guess I should be doing to test for sharpness anyway!). I don't know. I think the camera just has to have some kind of a code to bury in the EXIF to identify the lens & it uses the code that PhotoShop thinks is the Pentax-F 35-105. I don't know why it wouldn't use the code for the FA* 80-200/2.8 ED [IF]? But it apparently doesn't I just did a quick test on mine with the K20D & when you press the INFO button, it shows the correct focal length - 80 = 80, 200 = 200 and in between shows proportional focal lengths in between. -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- 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: Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO 80-200mm f/2.8 question
From: Darren Addy I'm curious... if it shows up in Photoshop as a Pentax-F 35-105mm, does that mean that it is also misreading the focal length that this lens is set at (when doing image stabilization)? If it is doing image stabilization for a 105mm focal length when the lens is set to 200mm, that could definitely lead to some lack of sharpness. I think I will see if I get better results with Image Stabilization off and tripod mount it (which I guess I should be doing to test for sharpness anyway!). I don't know. I think the camera just has to have some kind of a code to bury in the EXIF to identify the lens & it uses the code that PhotoShop thinks is the Pentax-F 35-105. I don't know why it wouldn't use the code for the FA* 80-200/2.8 ED [IF]? But it apparently doesn't I just did a quick test on mine with the K20D & when you press the INFO button, it shows the correct focal length - 80 = 80, 200 = 200 and in between shows proportional focal lengths in between. -- 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: Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO 80-200mm f/2.8 question
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Derby Chang wrote: > > I have one. Lovely, though weighty lens. And, yes, mine also makes a sound > when I roll it, like there ball bearing in there. Bought it last century, > and it's still working fine That is good to hear! (Your report, not the sound in the lens).Thanks for letting me know. Yep, there's a bit of heft in that lens but the way I look at it... some people spend good money to lift weights at the local spa while I get my workout in for free. (Alsothe workout warriors don't get f2.8 with their dumbbells). -- 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.
