But for those lenses without integrated hoods there are solutions
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PDML_--_ipth.html :-)
(I just wanted an excuse to post that).
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 15 Mar 2005 at 11:17, Tom C wrote:
Clear answer... Thanks. I figured it must have to due with possible
vign
Look here:
http://www.flexhood.com/
Peter
>What's a flexhood?
>
>Thanks
>
>Frantisek
Tom C wrote:
Keith Waley wrote:
The 35mm negative frame is not circular, it's rectangular.
Gee Keith. Thanks for clueing me in on that! :)
Yeah, that was sort of stupid, wasn't it?
If you ray-trace the 35mm frame out thru the lens, and project it
outward (the reverse of how light enters the le
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 15 Mar 2005 at 17:24, John Francis wrote:
>
> > The work about as well as they do for the central portion of a 35mm frame.
>
> How is that?
Well, take the lens, stick it in front on a FF camera, take a picture
and crop the centre portion so as to end
What's a flexhood?
Thanks
Frantisek
On 15 Mar 2005 at 17:24, John Francis wrote:
> The work about as well as they do for the central portion of a 35mm frame.
How is that?
> Sure, you could do better with a custom design for the APS-sized sensor.
> But it's not going to work any worse than it did on a 35mm film camera.
Extending t
Keith Waley wrote:
The 35mm negative frame is not circular, it's rectangular.
Gee Keith. Thanks for clueing me in on that! :)
If you ray-trace the 35mm frame out thru the lens, and project it outward
(the reverse of how light enters the lens, but for now, allow me that
reversal...) you'll find
Rob Studdert mused:
>
> On 15 Mar 2005 at 11:17, Tom C wrote:
>
> > Clear answer... Thanks. I figured it must have to due with possible
> > vignetting, as many wide angle hoods are rectangular. I didn't put two and
> > two
> > together and realize that the petal shape was a deliberate compromi
On 15 Mar 2005 at 23:06, Peter Smekal wrote:
> That's bad news for all of us who want to use some of the "old" lenses on
> the *istD. What about the A15/3.5 with its integrated hood for instance.
> There is not even a flexhood for Pentax.
I guess the market for Pentax gear isn't too significant :
>And is really only designed to complement a full 35mm frame, integrated hoods
>on 35mm full frame lenses aren't really suitable for use with APS sized
>sensors.
>
>http://www.flexhood.com/
>
>
>Rob Studdert
That's bad news for all of us who want to use some of the "old" lenses on
the *istD. What
On 15 Mar 2005 at 11:17, Tom C wrote:
> Clear answer... Thanks. I figured it must have to due with possible
> vignetting, as many wide angle hoods are rectangular. I didn't put two and
> two
> together and realize that the petal shape was a deliberate compromise for
> size.
And is really only
Tom C wrote:
Yesterday I received my FA 31/1.8 Limited. Purchased from another list
member who heard my pleas for help in finding one at a decent price. He
had one in brand spanking new condition, which I was able to purchase at
a reasonable price.
A beautiful lens.
I'm curious why it
On Mar 15, 2005, at 12:42 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
"Yesterday I received my FA 31/1.8 Limited. Purchased from another
list member who heard my pleas for help in finding one at a decent
price. He had one in brand spanking new condition, which I was able to
purchase at a reasonable price
Well, for the seller, it was a lens that was not seeing that much use, so it
was matter of getting a return on an idle piece of equipment that could be
reinvested.
Tom C.
From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pdml
Subject: Re: FA 31/1.8 Limited E
"Yesterday I received my FA 31/1.8 Limited. Purchased from another list
member who heard my pleas for help in finding one at a decent price. He
had one in brand spanking new condition, which I was able to purchase at
a reasonable price."
I cannot believe what I just read.
Someone g
Man.. will you guys all cut out the discussions on the FA 31/1.8 Limited !!
I'm doing everything in my power to NOT order one from B&H or Adorama...
wide angle goodness will be mine but not until later this year :)
Currently envious of everyone who's got one, :-)
Dave
Or
28
or 35) that they're thinking of parting with, I've been looking for some
enablement myself. :)
j
>-Original Message-
>From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 1:18 PM
>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>Subject: Re: FA 31/1.8 Limited Enabled
-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: FA 31/1.8 Limited Enabled
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:07:03 -0800
Tom C wrote:
Yesterday I received my FA 31/1.8 Limited. Purchased from another list
member who heard my pleas for help in finding one at a decent price. He
had o
Tom C wrote:
Yesterday I received my FA 31/1.8 Limited. Purchased from another list
member who heard my pleas for help in finding one at a decent price. He
had one in brand spanking new condition, which I was able to purchase at
a reasonable price.
A beautiful lens.
I'm curious why it
Yesterday I received my FA 31/1.8 Limited. Purchased from another list
member who heard my pleas for help in finding one at a decent price. He had
one in brand spanking new condition, which I was able to purchase at a
reasonable price.
A beautiful lens.
I'm curious why it has a flower-s
Bryan wrote:
>My second question is whether anyone has the SMCP FA 31mm f/1.8 Limited?
>It seems like a very nice lens. I would be interested in any thoughts
>about the lens from anyone who owns it or has used it. I have the SMCP
>FA 43mm f/1.9 Limited and the SMCP FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited and like
In a message dated 3/7/02 9:33:40 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< >How does the lens cap attach? I'm considering this lens, but looking at
>the front end
>design, I wonder if one can leave a filter on and still attach the lens
>cap. I always
>leave a skylight on each lens (each lens that take
Popular Photography changed the SQF system recently and scores from past
tests are not comparable with the new system - I don't remember when the 35
f2 was tested, but I think that the scores from it and the 31 LTD are on
two different scales. The new system was meant to be more stringent.
-
> I have a scanned copy of their review of the 35mm F2.0 also, and it
> seems to me they said the same things about this lens. I'll have to
> compare the numbers and see what that yields.
>
> Thanks,
> Ed
Pop Photo reviewed the FA 35 2.0 in Dec. 99. I made it a point to dig it
out. It is appare
IL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of T Rittenhouse
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 8:03 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Popular Photography 31/1.8 Limited test (WAS:
> Re: Pentax a "best ever prime lens" at Pop?)
>
>
> lpm
&g
lpm
Ciao,
Graywolf
- Original Message -
From: Dan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 6:32 PM
Subject: RE: Popular Photography 31/1.8 Limited test (WAS: Re: Pe
Ed,
What does the number between the f/stop and the letter grade stand for?
Dan Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>OK, I looked it up. Just for kicks, here's a comparison by the numbers
>of their current review of the 31 vs. their review of the 35 F2.0. I'm
>only giving the numbers at the 20"x24" end,
> And what exactly do they say about this lens?
>
> Pål
> -
>
Popular Photography never says that an advertiser's lenses are bad.
Still, the writer seemed especially effusive in praising the 31. I go by
the numbers in their MTF tests. According to these numbers, the lens is
consistently sharp at
>And what exactly do they say about this lens?
Just some pointless and meaningless comments, nothing haven't been said
before.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
Joseph wrote:
>There's no article, just reviews of the three prime lenses (including
>the 31 limited), plus a review of a zoom.
And what exactly do they say about this lens?
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the dir
If my sample of this lens is representative, then this lens will be a
somewhat controversial performer. Here are some characteristics.
It's very very sharp. It is indeed not that sharp wide open but still
better than any other lens I've tried at apertures of 1.8 and faster. I did
the test at a
s in there for good
when I tried to twist from the side.
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Audun Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 5:42 AM
Subject: Pentax FA 31/1.8 Limited; (very) early impressions
> Just
Moulded glass means "real" asphericals, right? Not the hybrid
glass-plus-resin?
If what I am saying here is right, what an impressive beast !
Albano
---
I think yes, but I know only that they wrote in press release...
Den
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
AAhh, these limiteds.
IMO, this is one of the most peculiar lens series ever released. PDML'ers
have speculated _a_lot_ over the focal lenghts; everything from complex
mathematical models to marketing tricks has been suggested. Mathematically,
the 43mm is the correct focal width for a normal lens
Pål Jensen writes:
> This is going to ruin me!
You want one too, eh?
I think I need a second job :(
Cheers,
- Dave
David A. Mann, B.E.
email [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
"Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up,
while children are allowed t
This is going to ruin me!
- Original Message -
From: "Denis Klimovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 11:10 PM
Subject: 31/1.8 limited
> Press release now published:
> http://www.penta-club.org/penta/news/2001/pe
Press release now published:
http://www.penta-club.org/penta/news/2001/pentax_lens35_lim_31_eng.shtml
8 moulded-glass aspherical lens elements!
Den
-
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 P
37 matches
Mail list logo
