Peter, I don't know how the Power Zoom 28-105 would handle on the LX.
Most autofocus lenses are harder to focus manually than manual focus
lenses (less resistance). It is a large lens, which is why it balances
nicely on the large 1p.
Joe
Hi Joe,
>
> thanks for your information. I saw that a Ge
Hi,
Edward Kreis schrieb:
> You ARE mistaken, as the lens probably designed by Tamron is FA
> 28-105/4-5.6 [IF], but the question was about FA 28-105/3.2-4.5 AL [IF],
> that has design
> similar to the 24-90 and looks the same out. This lens is built better
> than 27-70/4 IMHO, all rings moves s
-
>Lets not forget that the FA* 28-70/2.8 AL is compromised by NOT sporting
>IF. Lets not forget either that the 31 Limited has eight (8) AL elements.
>
>Pål
Heh, indeed:) And therefore 31 Ltd. is cheap, isn't it?:)
Greetz
Artur
--
Okresl Swoje potrzeby - my znajdziemy ofert
Artur wrote:
>I hope you've already gotten better by now... I don't agree with you but
>whatever you
>claim, your caustic remarks are unnecessary. There are still some, who
>cannot afford FA* 28-70/2.8 AL or something...
Lets not forget that the FA* 28-70/2.8 AL is compromised by NOT sporting
Tom wrote:
>This is not to say these are not good lenses, but I cringe every time I see
>a compromise in build quality flaunted as a feature.
If AL and IF signalize cheapness to you then you live in a parallel
universe to mine.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To un
Hi Joe,
thanks for your information. I saw that a German dealer is seeling new ones
for about 400 USD. I just wonder if such a power zoom also is good to use
manually, say on an LX.
Peter
>Peter, for the Z-1p you might also consider the Power Zoom FA 28-105
>f4-5.6. This lens was designed for t
"AL, a molded plastic non-spherical element, instead of several glass
elements. A cheaper way to build a lens."
>From the February 2002 Shutterbug, in a review of the 24-90 and the 31
Limited:
"Such 'hybrid' aspherics [i.e., bonding resin to the glass] are used in
the zoom lens [i.e., the F
Peter, for the Z-1p you might also consider the Power Zoom FA 28-105
f4-5.6. This lens was designed for the Z-1p (I own two of these bodies,
and have one of these lenses on each). It is a very good, sharp lens
that gives 1:3 macro at 105 mm. It is an older design and is probably
out of production
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105
> On Thursday, March 14, 2002, at 11:34 AM, T Rittenhouse wrote:
>
> > AL, a molded plastic non-spherical element, instead of several glass
> > el
TED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 14. maaliskuuta 2002 17:52
Aihe: Re: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105
>I look at posts like this and my guts tighten up. Let me translate some of
>those acronyms as used for lens of this class.
>
>IF, internal focusing, means it is
On Thursday, March 14, 2002, at 11:34 AM, T Rittenhouse wrote:
> AL, a molded plastic non-spherical element, instead of several glass
> elements. A cheaper way to build a lens.
Not entirely --
1) the element does not have to be plastic (though often it is)
2) AL elements can be used to minimiz
't trust their website.
Btw, I like the lens :-)
Petter Jarbo
Engelholm, Sweden
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] För Emmanuel Ingelsten
Skickat: den 14 mars 2002 12:28
Till: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ämne: Re: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105
Hi fellow
://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Peter Smekal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 14. maaliskuuta 2002 8:11
Aihe: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105
>I'm thinking about buying a good and not too expensive "
rsday, March 14, 2002 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105
> Hi,
> If I were you, I'd go for 28-70 if I needed to save some money. It's
really a great lens with constant aperture (a tiny bit faster than the 24-90
at the long end),
> although it has no IF. On the other h
At 03:52 14-3-2002 -0500, you wrote:
>From: Peter Smekal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105
>
>I'm thinking about buying a good and not too expensive "normal range" zoom
>lense to use on my Z1-p. There is the SMC-FA 28-70 mm/4,0 AL which I h
Artur Ledóchowski wrote
> -Original Message-
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 2:10 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: 28-70 vs 24-90 vs 28-105
>
> I'd avoid buying the 28-105, since, of course if i'm
> not mistaken, this is the lens based on the
Check the archives. This question (or very similar ones) have been posted
and answered about 3 or 4 times in the past 6 weeks. There's some good
comparative info already there in the archives. To help at least just a
little, here's a couple of the links (but there are plenty more)
http://www.m
Hi,
If I were you, I'd go for 28-70 if I needed to save some money. It's really a great
lens with constant aperture (a tiny bit faster than the 24-90 at the long end),
although it has no IF. On the other hand, if money weren't a problem I'd definitely go
for 24-90, since it's a great lens too a
Hi fellow swede!
Since this isn't about compating the lenses, but about a swedish store having a
special sale i will write in swedish...sorry to all the non-swedes.
hejsan peter!
kan inget om objektiven du snackar om men jag såg av en händelse att scandinavian har
nästan en tusenlappsrea på 2
I'm thinking about buying a good and not too expensive "normal range" zoom
lense to use on my Z1-p. There is the SMC-FA 28-70 mm/4,0 AL which I have
seen. It seems to be quite good and not too pricy. There are also two newer
lenses, both with more tele-range:
1) SMC-FA 24-90mm f/3.5-4.5 AL [IF] an
20 matches
Mail list logo
