A scroll of mail from Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 13
Aug 2001 23:24:29 +0200
Read it? y
> The problem is that you in this way seriously increas power
> consumption because you use two AF motors.
True. The power consumption will depend on the load on the AF
driveshaft, though
> Besid
A scroll of mail from Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 12
Aug 2001 15:41:52 +0200
Read it? y
> But this would make the camera AF motor to spin and make noise taking
> away the main benefit of USM; silent operation. All the camera needs
> to know is that an USM lens is mounted. This can easil
Dan wrote:
> If Pentax is moving production to lower cost countries, will the consumer
> price for the affected items be adjusted to reflect the lower production
> cost? Or is this primarily to improve profit margins on the items in
> question?
No idea. I suspect though that this is a respons t
Alexander wrote:
> I doubt very highly that the drop in prices was due "merely to currency
> fluctuations!" Why were the very popular FA* 85mm f/14, FA 50mm f/1.4, FA
> 35mm f/2.0, FA* 24mm f/2.0 lenses, and two Limited lenses NOT effected by
> these price fluctuations? Further, the pr
> I doubt very highly that the drop in prices was due "merely to
>currency
>fluctuations!" Why were the very popular FA* 85mm f/14, FA 50mm f/1.4, FA
>35mm f/2.0, FA* 24mm f/2.0 lenses, and two Limited lenses NOT effected by
>these price fluctuations? Further, the price percentage drops we
>If Pentax is moving production to lower cost countries, will the consumer
>price for the affected items be adjusted to reflect the lower production
>cost? Or is this primarily to improve profit margins on the items in
>question?
Um... let's put it this way. They would properly tell you that the
Hi Pál,
If Pentax is moving production to lower cost countries, will the consumer
price for the affected items be adjusted to reflect the lower production
cost? Or is this primarily to improve profit margins on the items in
question?
Thanks,
Dan Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pál wrote:
>They have c
I doubt very highly that the drop in prices was due "merely to currency
fluctuations!" Why were the very popular FA* 85mm f/14, FA 50mm f/1.4, FA
35mm f/2.0, FA* 24mm f/2.0 lenses, and two Limited lenses NOT effected by
these price fluctuations? Further, the price percentage drops were n
Way cool, Alexander. Thanks for the heads up.
I notice the FA* 24/2 has also dropped from ~$400 to ~$350-- does this make
it the cheapest an FA* lens has ever been? I think the FA 20/2.8 has gone
down a bit (~$475), also--but it isn't one I price regularly so I'm not
certain.
Since the FA 135/2.
Sounds interesting... USM stands for Ultra Sonic Motor, IIRC. Pentaxes have
AF motors built in the body (I got this info from the list), none of them
is USM (maybe some are?). USM lenses should have built-in AF motors. What
about power supply/control then, and what will AF motor in the body do
whi
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I just checked the B&H web site to see if the black Limited
lenses had
> come in. They haven't, but a number of the FA* lens prices have
dropped
> dramatically:
> FA* 200mm f/2.8 dropped from $1,039.95 to $854.95
>
The only arguement against that is that the MZ-S has a KAF2 lens mount, so
why would they release a brand new camera, then a brand new line of lenses
that have features the new camera cannot use? I suppose it might be
possible the MZ-S has extra capibilities in the digital contact though.
Otherw
I just checked the B&H web site to see if the black Limited lenses had
come in. They haven't, but a number of the FA* lens prices have dropped
dramatically:
FA* 200mm f/2.8 dropped from $1,039.95 to $854.95
FA* 28-70mm f/2.8 dropped from $1,064.95 to $979.95
F
13 matches
Mail list logo
