couple weeks this
summer while my Mz-S was in for repairs. The interface is very similar
to newer DSLRs - its a great camera.
Mark
On 10/18/2016 9:46 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
I snagged a remarkable piece of Pentax glass (according to reviewers:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Rear
I snagged a remarkable piece of Pentax glass (according to reviewers:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Rear-Teleconverter-A-1.4x-L.html
),
the Rear Converter A 1.4X-L with original box and case. This teleconverter
is said to work with these lenses:
- SMC Pentax-DA* 200mm F2.8
- SMC
entax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Recommended : Some really good 30-35 yr old Pentax Glass
I'll take all of 'em.
On 8/28/2012 11:10 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> I forgot to mention I also have the smck 15mm/3.5 but its a FF lens and
when
> used on aps its not really
2012 11:54 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Recommended : Some really good 30-35 yr old Pentax Glass
FWIW,
Here are some really old but near mint K prime lenses that I own & still use
that perform superbly on Pentax aps digital:
Smc K series(1975-1983) ( outstanding optic
ly good 30-35 yr old Pentax Glass
FWIW,
Here are some really old but near mint K prime lenses that I own & still use
that perform superbly on Pentax aps digital:
Smc K series(1975-1983) ( outstanding optics, build quality, and manual
focus feel.)
---
17/4 fisheye
18/3.5
20/4
are not
state of the art or even close to todays standards for zooms/long teles. But
dont be afraid of older Pentax glass, especially the K series primes listed.
These are MF gems.
-
J.C.O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML
Matthew Hunt wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
Examples:
100mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 15-20m;
50mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 7-10m;
28mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 3m!
I used the "Tabl
Charles Robinson wrote:
On Mar 15, 2011, at 17:02, Dario Bonazza wrote:
With a Samyang 8mm fisheye, there's no way to focus (lens helicoid has no
run enough to find focus). It happens that by setting the focus at its
minimum focus distance, the lens is almost (but not yet) focused at
infini
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
> Examples:
> 100mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 15-20m;
> 50mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 7-10m;
> 28mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 3m!
I used the "Table Output" feature
On Mar 15, 2011, at 17:02, Dario Bonazza wrote:
>
> With a Samyang 8mm fisheye, there's no way to focus (lens helicoid has no run
> enough to find focus). It happens that by setting the focus at its minimum
> focus distance, the lens is almost (but not yet) focused at infinity. By
> approaching
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:06 PM, wrote:
> Be ashamed, Matt. Privately pleased, but publically ashamed.
Well, now you've done it. My blog has a new subhead. The previous one
lasted all of 3 hours.
http://scotchtape.ductwhisky.com/p/taglines.html
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
.@pdml.net
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:00:57
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
The hugely expensive Novoflex adapters are only really necessary with
Pentax lenses that do not have an aperture ring. They allow manual
adj
Be ashamed, Matt. Privately pleased, but publically ashamed.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Hunt
Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 20:59:11
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
On Tue
I stand corrected. I appreciate having a reason not to buy it.
-Original Message-
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:00:57
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
The
com/group/cdsound/
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
>> Dario Bonazza
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 8:05 PM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> I bought a different one, which allows focus slightly beyond infinity.
The Buzz Lightyear Signature Edition, of course.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from t
Your adapter is setting the mount register too deep. I had the same
thing happen with a Pentax M42 adapter. I bought a different one,
which allows focus slightly beyond infinity. Cost me $6 for the
replacement.
Most lens mount adapters for FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds
intentionally run about ha
t;
> -Original Message-
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
> Dario Bonazza
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 8:05 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
>
>
> Let's do some math:
&g
/group/cdsound/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Dario Bonazza
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 8:05 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
Let's do some math:
K bayonet register = 45.46mm
m4/3
From: "Dario Bonazza"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
No name on it, found in ebay from Hong Kong. I bought it some time ago,
but I can no longer find trace of that auction. However, it
It sounds to me that you're adapter doesn't supply the proper flange
distance. Maybe it doesn't even keep the planes parallel.
On 3/15/2011 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Hello gang,
I've just tried a few Pentax lenses on my Panny GF-1 (via K-micro4/3
adapter), just to find a weird behaviour.
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Steven Desjardins
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 6:54 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
I'd like to hear this myself. What brand of adaptor?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at
ario
- Original Message -
From: "Steven Desjardins"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
I'd like to hear this myself. What brand of adaptor?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonaz
I'd like to hear this myself. What brand of adaptor?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
> Hello gang,
>
> I've just tried a few Pentax lenses on my Panny GF-1 (via K-micro4/3
> adapter), just to find a weird behaviour.
>
> With close subjects (inches to meters), the actual dis
Hello gang,
I've just tried a few Pentax lenses on my Panny GF-1 (via K-micro4/3
adapter), just to find a weird behaviour.
With close subjects (inches to meters), the actual distance of my subject
(properly focused by looking at magnified LCD) can be similar to that one
indicated on the dist
From: CheekyGeek
I'm guessing whichever ones will fit on his Leica.
>
> William Robb
William,
Have you, by chance, "corresponded with Ansel Adams and Fred Picker
while they were alive"?
http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2009/02/see-thru-pentaz-pz1.html?showComment=1233607896367#c757489225069739028
How about a different tack - since the 31 & 77 ARE his favorites, he
chooses based on what will allow him to broaden his horizons on this trip.
And, because it is Hawaii, I think some kind of macro is in order. Given
that it's limited to DA Limited lenses and FA limited lenses, is there
any ot
> I'm guessing whichever ones will fit on his Leica.
>
> William Robb
William,
Have you, by chance, "corresponded with Ansel Adams and Fred Picker
while they were alive"?
http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2009/02/see-thru-pentaz-pz1.html?showComment=1233607896367#c7574892250697390281
:)
Darren Addy
I thought about that combo...
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Sasha Sobol wrote:
> I would guess 15/21/31
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
>> On 5/14/2010 10:04 AM, CheekyGeek wrote:
>>>
>>> *I* would have the 35mm macro in, but I think HE'LL be taking the 31mm.
>>> I a
- Original Message -
From: "Larry Colen"
Subject: Re: Win some pentax glass
On 5/13/2010 9:53 PM, Fernando wrote:
Guess and explain what 3 limiteds Ned is taking to Hawaii and you can
win some "Pentax Glass":
http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2010/05/whats-in-y
I would guess 15/21/31
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
> On 5/14/2010 10:04 AM, CheekyGeek wrote:
>>
>> *I* would have the 35mm macro in, but I think HE'LL be taking the 31mm.
>> I also guessed DA 15mm, FA 31mm& FA 77mm but I fear that is too easy
>> and I was too late.
>
>
On 5/14/2010 10:04 AM, CheekyGeek wrote:
*I* would have the 35mm macro in, but I think HE'LL be taking the 31mm.
I also guessed DA 15mm, FA 31mm& FA 77mm but I fear that is too easy
and I was too late.
The 31 and 77 are two of his favorite lenses. He also speaks very highly
of the 15.
Dar
>> Guess and explain what 3 limiteds Ned is taking to Hawaii and you can
> >> win some "Pentax Glass":
> >> http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2010/05/whats-in-your-bag.html
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > I guessed the 21, 31 and 77.
> >
> >
*I* would have the 35mm macro in, but I think HE'LL be taking the 31mm.
I also guessed DA 15mm, FA 31mm & FA 77mm but I fear that is too easy
and I was too late.
Darren Addy
Kearney, NE
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
> Bob Sullivan wrote:
>
>> 31, 15, and 35 Macro???
>
>
I wrote:
Bob Sullivan wrote:
31, 15, and 35 Macro???
No, no, no! Should you get the 35 macro in, both the 31mm and the 40mm
would be out.
In this case, 21 + 35 macro + 70/77 would be a nice outfit.
Dario
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/
Bob Sullivan wrote:
31, 15, and 35 Macro???
No, no, no! Should you get the 35 macro in, both the 31mm and the 40mm would
be out.
Dario
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link direct
On 2010-05-14 10:40 , Bob Sullivan wrote:
31, 15, and 35 Macro???
my first thought was a macro would be in his kit
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the di
31, 15, and 35 Macro???
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
> Fernando wrote:
>
>> I was going with that, but changed to 15, 31, 77 at the last minute...
>
> Above would be my choice, hence I believe Ned will choose 21, 40, 77 instead
> ;-)
>
> Dario
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discus
Fernando wrote:
I was going with that, but changed to 15, 31, 77 at the last minute...
Above would be my choice, hence I believe Ned will choose 21, 40, 77 instead
;-)
Dario
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from
I was going with that, but changed to 15, 31, 77 at the last minute...
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> On 5/13/2010 9:53 PM, Fernando wrote:
>>
>> Guess and explain what 3 limiteds Ned is taking to Hawaii and you can
>> win some &q
On 5/13/2010 9:53 PM, Fernando wrote:
Guess and explain what 3 limiteds Ned is taking to Hawaii and you can
win some "Pentax Glass":
http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2010/05/whats-in-your-bag.html
Thanks.
I guessed the 21, 31 and 77.
PS: I hope is not a Pentax-branded beer glass.
Guess and explain what 3 limiteds Ned is taking to Hawaii and you can
win some "Pentax Glass":
http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2010/05/whats-in-your-bag.html
PS: I hope is not a Pentax-branded beer glass.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ferand/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDM
An old italian bicycle:
Probably not worth shipping anyplace but at least a few folks
might appreciate it:
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/bik/1724356207.html
Minolta/Sony mount 70-210:
Here's one for Mark...
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/pho/1724367067.html
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Ken Waller wrote:
>
> Now go out & use that sucker !
Heh, just try and stop me! :-) I've been loving it so far. It has
already revealed flaws in the DA 18-55 lens to me, so I'm afraid that my
next upgrade has already been mapped out.
Thanks!
-bmw
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml
Businesses are not charities. They offer extended warranties because
they expect to profit on them.
Joe
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
From: "Bruce Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Extended store warranty on Pentax glass worth-while?
> I'm interested in comments on what PDMLers think about extending the
> Pentax factory warranty (2 years in Canada) with an extended warranty.
> My impression i
While Henry's Extended Warranty is excellent (I've received at least
two free CLA's from it, and several replacements, in the mountain of
used gear I've bought from them over the years) I wouldn't bother
getting it with new gear where you have a manufacturer's wwarranty
unless the manufacturer in q
Few of these store or extended warranty policies are worth anything
other than as profit to the company and to the store. Lenses rarely
break unless you damage them, and damage of that sort is never covered.
If you want extended warranty protection, check your credit cards and
see if any off
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Walker"
Subject: Extended store warranty on Pentax glass worth-while?
> I'm interested in comments on what PDMLers think about extending the
> Pentax factory warranty (2 years in Canada) with an extended warranty.
> My impressi
>
> From: Bruce Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2008/06/22 Sun PM 02:33:38 GMT
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Extended store warranty on Pentax glass worth-while?
>
> I'm interested in comments on what PDMLers think about extending the
>
Very few extended warranties are worthwhile. You avoided a store tax.
The only extended warranty I've ever purchased is AppleCare for Macs.
I think that's a bit of a ripoff as well, but it's a necessary evil.
Paul
On Jun 22, 2008, at 10:33 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> I'm interested in comments o
I'm interested in comments on what PDMLers think about extending the
Pentax factory warranty (2 years in Canada) with an extended warranty.
My impression is that Pentax lenses, especially such as the Limited
ones, are very rugged and reliable and so an extended warranty is a
waste of money.
B
Hi
The lens roadmap shows a 55-300 in the pipleine.. Does anyone know
whether this will be an SDM lens ?
--
Regards
Patrick Genovese
-
Patrick, I believe we don't know yet. It seems that this lens will be a
complement to the forthcoming 17-70. If both of those are consumer
lenses, th
Hi
The lens roadmap shows a 55-300 in the pipleine.. Does anyone know
whether this will be an SDM lens ?
--
Regards
Patrick Genovese
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
The K100D does indeed have a half-press position on the shutter.
The DL/DL2 doe have rather slow AF, the D and DS are faster, but the
K100D is faster than the DS and more positive than the D.
-Adam
Russell Kerstetter wrote:
> I have a DL, which is the only AF slr I have really used, so I never
I tried one of those lenses and didn't like it much, possibly the
slow AF performance on the *ist DS contributed to my dislike for it
but mostly I just found the lens wasn't fast enough and it was bulky
as all heck for my uses.
G
On Dec 26, 2006, at 12:30 PM, Tom C wrote:
> On heavier lens
frey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: AF speeds (was: Pentax glass)
>Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 12:18:11 -0800
>
>The D/DS/DL generation all have variants of the same AF system, with
>minor differe
The D/DS/DL generation all have variants of the same AF system, with
minor differences in speed between them. The K100/K10 generation have
a newer version of the AF system which is substantially faster in
operation.
G
On Dec 26, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Russell Kerstetter wrote:
> I have a DL, w
I have a DL, which is the only AF slr I have really used, so I never
had anything to compare to. I never went out to look at any of the
new bodies, because I can't afford one, so why torture myself? But I
happened to be at the store the other day, where they happened to have
a K100D... the first
Might be a bit before i can try it. No outdoor shows for a while. I;ll
need to find some horses running around outside in a paddock or a kids
out door hockey game, if it ever stops raining here.
Sig. Another crappy winter for B&W film.
I ususually use AF-S for my action work, using th
Beleive me when I tell you AF of the K10D is WAY faster than AF from
ist-D even with current cheap lens as a DA 18-55 !
2006/12/25, John Sessoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > From:
> > Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Dec 25, 2006, at 9:40 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
> >
> >> The one thing I
Word of warning, don't buy SDHC cards at 2mb's per second they are a
tenth of the speed of current fast SD cards. The expensive ones are
6mb's per second so less than a third of the speeds currently
available.
I have attempted some children's soccer games with the DS and a fast
card. Regrettably t
Paul Stenquist wrote:
> I'm anxious to hear how the K10 works for you in action shoots. So
> far, I find it works quite well on continuous autofocus. I'm looking
> forward to seeing how it performs with the DA* lenses.
> Paul
Considering how well my *ist D has done at the track with FA* lenses
I'm anxious to hear how the K10 works for you in action shoots. So
far, I find it works quite well on continuous autofocus. I'm looking
forward to seeing how it performs with the DA* lenses.
Paul
On Dec 25, 2006, at 9:44 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
> Quoting John Sessoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
Quoting John Sessoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Humm
>>
>> I use Nikons for my "paying" work and have good nikonglass aswell.(D1,
>> D1H,D1H,D200, 70-200 F2.8VR etc)
>>
>> However, just because Pentax does not have a five pound body does not
>> mean it cannot be
What Godders said. I was going to respond, but he said it all.
Whether or not it's worth the wait is your decision.
Paul
On Dec 25, 2006, at 6:00 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> On Dec 25, 2006, at 2:22 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
>
>> I currently have the *ist-D and a PZ-1P. Neither has proved really
On Dec 25, 2006, at 2:22 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
> I currently have the *ist-D and a PZ-1P. Neither has proved really
> satisfactory for sports photography in continuous auto-focus, although
> the PZ-1P holds a slight edge.
The *ist D was a bit too slow overall to satisfy my desires, and I
gene
>
> From:
> Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Dec 25, 2006, at 9:40 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
>
>> The one thing I've found my Pentax doesn't work well for is sports
>> action. The continuous auto-focus mode just doesn't work fast enough to
>> keep up with baseball, football (American style)
On Dec 25, 2006, at 9:40 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
> The one thing I've found my Pentax doesn't work well for is sports
> action. The continuous auto-focus mode just doesn't work fast
> enough to
> keep up with baseball, football (American style) or football (what the
> rest of the world knows as
> David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Humm
>
> I use Nikons for my "paying" work and have good nikonglass aswell.(D1,
> D1H,D1H,D200, 70-200 F2.8VR etc)
>
> However, just because Pentax does not have a five pound body does not
> mean it cannot be used as a "pro" camera. I often use my Pentax
>
gt; > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> At 02:50 PM 12/22/06, you wrote:
>> > > >>> Dave show some compassion to a brother in distress. Jay I'll
>> > > >>> offer you
>> > > >>> £100 sterling
Yes, I do have the A100mm F2.8 auto focus macro,
also 50mm F2.8 macro and 100mm F4.0 macro and some newer auto focus glass...
At 08:54 PM 12/23/06, you wrote:
>j, I am surprised you have no A100/2.8 macro. I have one if you are
>looking to expand your collection of the best Pentax gla
gt; > > >>> Peter
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 12/22/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>>> What have you got?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I may be interested in taking some
Well, you can always say you didn't make any bets about what Hoya would
make.
Cotty wrote:
> On 23/12/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> It could also be an idea to keep an eye on Cotty. If he prepares to eat his
>> hat, the market is going up.
>
> At this moment in time my offic
j, I am surprised you have no A100/2.8 macro. I have one if you are
looking to expand your collection of the best Pentax glass...I also
note you have nothing less than 10-15 years old. I have a few newer
lenses for sale.
On Dec 23, 2006, at 8:03 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Stan
> j are
gt;>> £100 sterling although obviously at that price you would have to pay
> > >>> the postage!
> > >>>
> > >>> Peter
> > >>>
> > >>> On 12/22/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>> W
j,
Did he say Pentax glass?
I thought you said Nikon lenses.
The Pentax stuff is worthless...
They use those obslete aperture levers.
Regards, Bob S.
On 12/23/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 23/12/06, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >And the rest!
> >
&g
On 23/12/06, j, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Couple others I have are 135 F1.8, 15 F3.5, 18
>F3.5, 16 F2.8 fish, 17 F4.0 fish, 200 F4.0 macro,
>1000mm mirror..What do you think they are worth ?
'j', huh. Welcome back Caveman.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pa
On 23/12/06, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:
>And the rest!
>
>I paid $900 for mint in box back in 2001. Sold for for $1400 a couple a
>years later.
>On 23/12/06, Bob Sullivan, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>A85/1.4 - $1,000+
Sorry Bob, I missed seeing the '+' at the end of the '$1000' so yo
On 23/12/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
>It could also be an idea to keep an eye on Cotty. If he prepares to eat his
>hat, the market is going up.
At this moment in time my official prediction is 75% chance that Pentax
will never release a 35mm-style DSLR with a sensor at or around 3
On 23/12/06, Bob Sullivan, discombobulated, unleashed:
>A85/1.4 - $1,000
And the rest!
I paid $900 for mint in box back in 2001. Sold for for $1400 a couple a
years later.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
___
Did ya ever buy anything consumer grade? You have nothing but the
utterly expensive ones.
Dave
j wrote:
> Couple others I have are 135 F1.8, 15 F3.5, 18
> F3.5, 16 F2.8 fish, 17 F4.0 fish, 200 F4.0 macro,
> 1000mm mirror..What do you think they are worth ? Thanks
>
> At 02:54 PM 12/23/06,
I don't know what they're worth, but in truth I have all the lenses I
need anyway. I intend to be using them for some time to come.
Was out taking pictures with the K10D and the DA14/FA35 this morning.
Just looked at the RAW captures. Stunning! This is a great camera,
these are excellent len
t; >>> the postage!
> >>>
> >>> Peter
> >>>
> >>> On 12/22/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>> What have you got?
> >>>>
> >>>> I may be interested in taking some of it off your han
the postage!
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> On 12/22/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> What have you got?
>>>>
>>>> I may be interested in taking some of it off your hands, It
>>>> shouldn't
>>>&g
Nope.
I have the K10D, two istD's and a D1, D1H, D2H, and D200.
You can have your cake and eat it to.
Dave
Quoting j <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
> Pentax glass, as I still have not bought a digital body in t
nterested in taking some of it off your hands, It shouldn't
> > > be worth much. I'd say AU$100 for the lot
> > >
> > > :-)
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > On 12/22/06, j <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > SO what does everyone thin
any direction.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of j
Sent: 22. desember 2006 14:59
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Pentax glass
SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
Pentax
;t
>>> be worth much. I'd say AU$100 for the lot
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>> On 12/22/06, j <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
>>>>
dn't
> > be worth much. I'd say AU$100 for the lot
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > On 12/22/06, j <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
> > > Pentax glass, as I sti
I'll give you two, (and pay postage).
Doug Brewer wrote:
> j wrote:
>
>> SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
>> Pentax glass, as I still have not bought a digital body in the Pentax
>> brand, however I do have a Nikon D1x and D1
Well, sell the high end Pentax glass to us and get yourself a D200 :-)
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af j
Sendt: 22. december 2006 14:59
Til: pdml
Pentax lenses and thus are affecting prices now much
more than they did intially.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Paul Stenquist
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 10:30 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass
As soon as
As soon as Pentax began selling digital cameras. lens prices began to
rise. I know. I was buying at the time.
Paul
On Dec 22, 2006, at 10:11 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
> I wish lens prices would go down, but I can only see them going up. I
> think you can be sure that Pentax high end glass will b
I wish lens prices would go down, but I can only see them going up. I
think you can be sure that Pentax high end glass will be premium
priced. The success of the K100 and K10 virtually guarantee that.
Even the introduction of the D sent the lens prices skyrocketing.
It's bound to happen again.
---
- Original Message -
From: "j"
Subject: Pentax glass
> SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
> Pentax glass, as I still have not bought a digital body in the Pentax
> brand, however I do have a Nikon D1x and D100..What do you think ??? j
appen again. No one, other than hair splitters, cares
about the management structure. It's irrelevant.
Paul
On Dec 22, 2006, at 2:37 PM, John Francis wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 08:59:25AM -0500, j wrote:
>> SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
&g
t off your hands, It shouldn't
> be worth much. I'd say AU$100 for the lot
>
> :-)
>
> Dave
>
> On 12/22/06, j <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
> > Pentax glass, as I still have not bou
Speaking of which, I still have a 135 SMC-M and a 200 SMC-m for sale. The 50
1.4 is gone.
Good price to a good home!
Walt
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 08:59:25AM -0500, j wrote:
> SO what does everyone think, is it time to unload all my high end
> Pentax glass, as I still have not bought a digital body in the Pentax
> brand, however I do have a Nikon D1x and D100..What do you think ??? jay
I think some peopl
1 - 100 of 379 matches
Mail list logo
