ml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Collin Brendemuehl
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 2:57 PM
To: pdml
Subject: Re: smc 135/2.5
jco,
Thanks for the info.
It is the m42 version, but I am now not in
front of it to see the aperture.
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
"
jco,
Thanks for the info.
It is the m42 version, but I am now not in
front of it to see the aperture.
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose"
-- Jim Elliott
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/m
DISC Discussions :
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdsound/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Collin Brendemuehl
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 2:13 PM
To: pdml
Subject: smc 135/2.
There is one in town here that I
can get to anyone for $225 shipped.
Glass is perfect, body shows light wear,
auto switch is stiff. With caps. A nice sample.
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose"
-- Jim Elliott
--
PDML
ally
wanted one.
:-)
Paul Delcour
> From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:29:43 -0700
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Pentax A28-135/4 --- SMC 135/2.5
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-
Sorry to disapoint you, the K 135/2.5 you narrowed your search to is
limited to 1.5 m (enough for portraits if you ask me, but tastes may
vary). To get closer than that you'll have to look at FA 135/2.8.
Or the F135/2.8, but I recommend the FA which has better mechanical design.
Alan Chan
ht
gt; > From: Alin Flaider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:27:49 +0300
> > To: Paul Delcour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: Pentax A28-135/4 --- SMC 135/2.5
> > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
Paul wrote:
PD> that reminds me that the min. focus disctance at 1.7m makes the lens partly
PD> useless. I often get much closer than that.
Sorry to disapoint you, the K 135/2.5 you narrowed your search to is
limited to 1.5 m (enough for portraits if you ask me, but tastes may
vary). To get
> Ah Fred, that reminds me that the min. focus disctance at 1.7m
> makes the lens partly useless. I often get much closer than that.
Min focus distance is an annoying aspect of many lenses - for me,
it's not a constant annoyance, but only an occasional frustration,
but sometimes - depending on the
Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>(Myself, I'd be using only primes for situations that
>required low rectilinear distortion.)
What he said!
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Paul Delcour wrote:
> that reminds me that the min. focus disctance at 1.7m makes the lens partly
> useless. I often get much closer than that. Can any zoom handle that better?
The FA28-80/3.5-5.6, 0.5m across the zoom range. The FA50/1.7 is
0.45m, for comparison.
OK, not ma
te: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:36:48 -0400
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Pentax A28-135/4 --- SMC 135/2.5
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:36:58 -0400
>
>> The SMC-A 28-135/4 did not last long in my outfit, because I had
>> to draw
>> The SMC-A 28-135/4 did not last long in my outfit, because I had
>> to draw the line at holding a heavy lens that had such severe
>> rectilinear distortion.
> [and I replied] It is true that the A 28-135/4's strongest point
> is certainly not its distortion (it does have a fair amount of
> p
Paul,
I owned an A28-135/4 for a while. The photo quality was good, but it is
indeed a large lens. It has a very large front element (77mm filter
diameter) and only does macro (close focus) at its 28mm setting. Try one if
you can to see if you like the handling.
--Mark
Paul Writes-
Alan Chan wrote:
> I have never used the zooms you mentioned, but the issue
assoicated with the
> SMC-A 28-135/4 is weight.
Hi Alan,
Long ago I resolved that I would bear the weight of any lens
that helped me produce the results I wanted.
The SMC-A 28-135/4 did not last long in my outfit, bec
I have never used the zooms you mentioned, but the issue assoicated with the
SMC-A 28-135/4 is weight. Other lenses you might consider included SMC-A
35-105/3.5 & Tamron SP 28-75/2.8.
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
you may think I'm trying to collect Pentax lenses...
I'm still consideri
Hi all,
you may think I'm trying to collect Pentax lenses...
I'm still considering to get a good zoom for parties, weddings, any
situation where switching primes can be tedious and makeing me miss shots.
There's an A28-135/4 on a secondhand site for sale at about 200$. From what
I've read on some
The other day, someone on the list mentioned a 2.5/135 SMC lens that was for
sale. If it is still available, could that person shout at me off-list.
Thanks.
-Jim Rupprecht
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. D
http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/for_sale/
-
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 Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
19 matches
Mail list logo
