On Tue 2001-05-01 (19:12), John Mustarde wrote:
> When my A50/1.7 aperture got stuck, it was because one of the metal
> tabs inside the aperture ring, at the A button, had come loose. This
> loose piece of metal prevented the ring from turning through all the
> stops. So I removed the offending pi
John Mustarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>When my A50/1.7 aperture got stuck, it was because one of the metal
>tabs inside the aperture ring, at the A button, had come loose. This
>loose piece of metal prevented the ring from turning through all the
>stops. So I removed the offending piece of met
On Wed 2001-05-02 (13:24), Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote:
> John Mustarde wrote:
>
> "But, unfortunately I never got the A electrical contacts back into
> place, so now my A 50/1.7 is an M 50/1.7."
>
> John, would you mind explaining to me the difference between the M and the
> A? (I have an A)...
John Mustarde wrote:
"But, unfortunately I never got the A electrical contacts back into
place, so now my A 50/1.7 is an M 50/1.7."
John, would you mind explaining to me the difference between the M and the
A? (I have an A)...
TIA,
fairy.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.
- Original Message -
From: "John Mustarde" But, unfortunately I never got the A electrical contacts back
into
> place, so now my A 50/1.7 is an M 50/1.7.
Mine is a very small ashtray. You did better than I did.
William Robb
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsub
>Unfortunately, I found out yesterday that my old 1.7/50 (A) is blocked -
>I can move between aperture 1.7 and 11, but not smaller and not A.
>
>
>BTW: is this a common problem, that the aperture lever of the lenses gets
>worn out? It's this small platic block within the gap of the mount that
>tra
AIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 4:41 AM
Subject: Re: SMC-FA 1.4/50 vs. 1.7/50
>
> Just to avoid any confusion. C/N/M 1.8 lenses look all like glued
> cardboard, some are enormous, they lack some of their peers features,
> but all are good optics. I can confirm tha
Just to avoid any confusion. C/N/M 1.8 lenses look all like glued
cardboard, some are enormous, they lack some of their peers features,
but all are good optics. I can confirm that, except for flare, Canon
50/1.8 is the equal of Pentax FA 50/1.7.
Maybe offering a cheap standard prime is
Recently Martin Trautmann wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, I found out yesterday that my old 1.7/50 (A) is blocked -
> I can move between aperture 1.7 and 11, but not smaller and not A.
I might have interest in bying it. Please contact me off the list
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) if you are interested in selli
On Mon 2001-04-30 (04:04), Bojidar Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Recently Martin Trautmann wrote:
> >
> > what's your recommendation for those two lenses?
> >
> > http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,7.html
> > http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,4.html
>
> Well,
Hi,
Recently Martin Trautmann wrote:
>
> what's your recommendation for those two lenses?
>
> http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,7.html
> http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,4.html
Well, if you were closer to Hamburg you could try out both... There is an
F5
Hi all,
what's your recommendation for those two lenses?
http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,7.html
http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,4.html
I'm surprised how expensive the 1.7 is - it costs about 350 DM in Germany
(that's about US$ 160), while other lenses
12 matches
Mail list logo
