Hi Michael,
you got a couple of answers already and I am essentially in line. Forget
about Jessops own range.
It depends on your subject matter, type of camera and length of lens what
to recommend. My tripod is a Manfrotto 190, slightly lighter in weight and
size than Frantisek's 055. I used it
I used to own the older Tamron 90/2.5 (old 49mm filter version; stolen
earlier this year) and replaced it with the Pentax M 85/2. My wife owns
the the Pentax M 100/2.8 (non-macro) which is essentially the same as the
A 100/2.8. I never handled the FA 100/3.5.
You ask about the application of
I forgot to write, I also own the matched Tamron converter for the 90/2.5.
Mine didn't work well: to low contrast. I suggest a cheap 200mm. Costs the
same as the converter and works way better for me. Joachim
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
Hi Joachim.
I think those are very different lenses both in purpose and in
performance.
The handling of the 85/2 is great for me, especially on a smallish
camera as the Program A I own.
The long throw of the focusing helicoid is very useful when you're
trying to set the exact point of
Hi Paul,
I have used Kodak T400CN and Ilford XP2 super. With the labs I tried I got
the by far better results form the Ilford. I got some excellent portraits.
Ilford doesn't recommend its film to be pushed. I experience this film
strongly dislikes being underexposed. I recommend it to be
I received a Pentax M 85/2 to replace my stolen Tamron 90/2.5 with. There
was a lot of discussion recently and someone wrote he prefers the Tamron
over the small Pentax, I want to add my two pennies on the handling. Since
I didn't get any pictures back yet, it is just the handling.
I use (used)
Dear Boz,
I looked at your newly updated Pentax pages. With respect to the primes I
hold this is a clear improvement. I spotted a typo in your description of
the FA43/1.9. You write: "..., the AF somwhat low." I guess you meant the
AF is slow. The "is" is missing as well.
Since my FA50/1.4 got
My FA50/1.4 mounted on the PZ1 is not slow to focus
and the focusing ring is not stiff at all, just a tad
too narrow.
Herbet.
Hmm, I didn't write anything about stiff. Did you ever try a cheapo zoom
(35-80, 28-80)? They are a lot faster, at least on the MZ-5n.
-
This message is from the
lenses out of the home, though I'm very careful to guard my
Vivitar Series One 28/1.9 when it's out and about.
--
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:24:11 + (GMT)
From: "J. Hein" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lens collectors (Was: Re: [EMAIL
* From: Paul.Stregevsky
* Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 14:47:57 -0800
You said it, Gerald. Several of my
* From: Evan Hanson
* Subject: Help! My kids stole my Pentax (teaching kids photography)
* Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 06:18:14 -0800
I am not sure how interesting this still is, but I feel I need to add my
two cents to this one. There has been a lot of discussion on the Tamron
adaptall-2 mount for Pentax. Not all of that was fully accurate. Some
aspects are correctly described in Boz's Pentax pages as well.
1) There is an
* From: David A. Mann
* Subject: 43mm Limited, 1st impressions
* Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 01:01:47 -0800
Hi David,
I recently
Hi there, I am back from the weekend and read the large number of answers
to my question. Thanks to all who contributed.
The advise I take so far: Try to avoid push processing and try to buy
something which has the speed I want printed on the box. What I am a bit
disapointed about, apparently
Hi, I need recommendations for a fast C41 print film to go with Kodak
Porta 160VS. I would like to have it matching in colour, not a too
obvious change. Since I replaced my stolen FA50/1.4 with a FA43/1.9 it
should be at least ISO1000, preferably ISO1600.
It will be for low light available light
I just spotted on www.pentax.de, they expect an availability of the MZ-S
in June 2001. Not sure whether this was reported already. If so, please
ignore. Joachim
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget
Okay; I find my ZX-M to have a good viewfinder (bright, clear, and
understandable) when it comes to manually focusing lenses.
Can the same be said for all other ZX (AF) bodies? (I do not have a store
nearby that carries anything but the ZX30, to check this out, and I am not
interested in
Dear Tiger,
did I read right, you bought the new 2.8 version which goes down to 1:1,
correct?
I am not really sure I want/need that, but one of my concerns is its
manual focus capability. I understand on MF it goes in less than a full
turn (330 deg or so) from infinity to 1:1. The 90/2.5 MF I
Would this be LIST price or expected street price?
Michel
I believe it is list, but normally in Europe this is not as ridiculous as
in the US. Especially for newly marketed items. I would expect one has to
pay within 10% of that in the shops, at least for the first few months
until the
Dear all, anyone experience with the quite inexpensive Vivitar 730 AF or
740 AF? I ran across them today in a shop. Spec seems decent for the price
(Bounce and tilt, zoom as well as IR spot beam.) but I was wondering about
the quality, especially the exposure accuracy, whether it quenches quick
Just as a follow up. I just learned, Manfrotto released a new 190 version
with a horizontal mountable center colummn. Joachim
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users'
Hi all,
Fill-in flash is the weak spot of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n as you call it in
the US).
I've been trying to do fill-in flash for portraits but find the low sync
speed of the ZX-5n (1/100) really limits me. I do prefer blurring the
The PZ-1p offers 1/250s sync speed.
background in
22 matches
Mail list logo
