Hi Patrick,
I don't have a good answer to your problem, but I can
certainly sympathize, as my black KX is doing exactly
the same thing. In my case, I suspect a bad contact in
the main switch around the shutter release.
When I first bought the camera, the meter reading was
consistantly giving a
Um,
I'm probably not the first one to think of this, but
if you have a K or M lens that you just ~must~ use
with the *ist D, why not remove the aperture coupling
arm??? It would effectively turn it into a manual
diaphragm lens. Of course it would be a shame to do
this to a really nice lens like
Hi Kostas,
I went out of my way to find a -5n (now
discontinued)and paid quite a bit more for it than the
MZ-6 (or ZX-L as is here in the US). I had some good
reasons for doing this.
1) The spot meter function on the -6 is only available
as a custom function mode of the memory lock button.
Not
Dan Scott wrote:
Perhaps someone could suggest an
older, manual focus 24mm with a more modest weight
and
girth?
24mm f/3.5K. A beauty!
John
24mm f/2.8K. Also a beauty. It is 2/3 stop faster AND
a little smaller and lighter than the 24/K f3.5 (!)
but w/52mm vs. 58mm filter threads. This can
Wow! The Feb. PUG is already up and there is a lot of
really nice work this time. Great job to all you who
submitted this month.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
I will second the comments Andre made concerning the K
35/3.5. It is one hell of a sharp lens with
practically no flare at all. I have comtemplated
replacing it with one of Pentax's f2 versions, but I
can't really justify two 35's and I'm NOT getting rid
of my K 35/3.5. It is the lightest of their
I would like to know if others with this lens have
had similar results.
I actually have the K 100/4 macro (same optics
though), and can second your comments at the
subjective level. Landscapes shot with this lens don't
seem to have the razor sharpness, contrast and
brilliance that I get with
Joe Wrote:
So here's what I need:
A zoom range of about 80-200 mm.
Macro (magnification) capability of at least 1:3.
Constant f2.8 aperture.
This is a pretty tall order, as most of the faster
telephoto zooms don't have great close-focus
specifications. If you ~REALLY~ need a fast (i.e.
Hello,
I know some of you hate having the original thought
stream of a thread de-railed, so I am giving this
query a new subject line. I have been following the
ZX-5N in Africa discussion, and wanted the groups
opinions concerning which Pentax bodies are the most
durable. Which ones
[snip]
...But if you have a fixed lens, you may have to be a
bit more creative in selecting your vantage point.
I hear a lot of this talk about fixed lenses ~forcing~
one to seek out creative vantage points. The operative
phrase here is seek out creative vantage points.
This can (and should) be
Can't say for A,
Why would you want to use 1/22 in the first place? I
am just curious.
I know that f22 sounds like an overkill, (especially
with wide angle lenses), but I frequently use every
inch of the DOF available to me. I am a botanist, and
I like to make environmental portraits of very
Hi,
Can anyone out there please give me some suggestions
for a good K-mount ultra-wide? I am looking for
something wider than 20mm, but which can still be
filtered.
The A/K-15mm f3.5 tragically dosen't even have a gel
holder behind the rear element.
The K-18mm f3.5 seems great (rear gel
I am ~assuming~ that you are talking about the A*
200mm f4 macro (not the new FA*). The A* version comes
up rarely on e-bay and they seem to sell for around
$850 U.S. That is aproximately what I paid for mine in
like-new condition with a soft case and a B+W UV
filter attached. Mind you, though,
Can anyone tell me which teleconverters fit the F*
300mm f4.5 and FA* 300mm f4.5 lenses? I seem to recall
someone mentioning that the L teleconverters
(supposedly for lenses 300mm and up) do not work. I
happen to own the Pentax 2X-L teleconverter. Will this
work or do I need to purchase the S
14 matches
Mail list logo
