Mark,
Again, remember price point. For your willingness to spend the money
to get a 1DS (that's correct isn't it?) Canon is a far better line for
you to be in. Even though Pal disagrees with me, I think Pentax
caters to Pros in the medium format market. Their 35mm offerings are
really geared to
Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Again, remember price point. For your willingness to spend the money
>to get a 1DS (that's correct isn't it?) Canon is a far better line for
>you to be in. Even though Pal disagrees with me, I think Pentax
>caters to Pros in the medium format market. The
Mark wrote:
> I'm probably not alone in my disappointment that Pentax's new 18-35 zoom
> is a cheesy "J" lens with an aperture of 4.0-5.6, but it makes it even
> worse to see something like this:
>
> 17-40mm zoom
> Constant f/4.0 aperture
> Canon mount :(
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0302/0302
On Thursday, Feb 27, 2003, at 19:21 Europe/Warsaw, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Again, remember price point. For your willingness to spend the money
to get a 1DS (that's correct isn't it?) Canon is a far better line for
you to be in. Even though Pal disagrees with me, I think Pentax
caters to Pros in the
How about we wait and see what else they have in their bag...who knows
we could still get a couple of FA* lenses in the super wide ranges to go
with this puppy. A FA* 14mm, or an FA* 17-35mm, and an FA* 35-135mm
would be pretty handy would'nt they?
Cheers
Shaun
Mark Roberts wrote:
I'm probabl
When was the last time we got a star lens? The 200/4? What was that, 3
years ago?
tv
> -Original Message-
> From: Shaun Canning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> How about we wait and see what else they have in their
> bag...who knows
> we could still get a couple of FA* lenses in the super
"tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>When was the last time we got a star lens? The 200/4? What was that, 3
>years ago?
So we're overdue!
(I'm an optim*ist!)
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
I'm with John Mustarde...I have a lovely Tokina 300mm f2.8 and a 1.7x AF
converter that just became a 765mm f4.5 AF lens...
:-) :-) :-) ;-)
Cheers
Shaun
Ryan K. Brooks wrote:
Indeed.
I've been considering how the great FA300/4.5 will become a very nice,
very portable medium-long wildlife len
Well it's a Canon so it's like a cheesy j lens by default, otherwise I
find it to be just a tad depressing.
At 12:41 PM 2/27/2003 -0500, you wrote:
I'm probably not alone in my disappointment that Pentax's new 18-35 zoom
is a cheesy "J" lens with an aperture of 4.0-5.6, but it makes it even
worse t
ers,
Dave
View my images online at Usefilm.com
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=603
-Original Message-
From: Peter Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 7:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The lens that Pentax SHOULD have made...
W
CTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: The lens that Pentax SHOULD have made...
> Well it's a Canon so it's like a cheesy j lens by default, otherwise I
> find it to be just a tad depressing.
>
> At 12:41 PM 2/27/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> >I'm pr
t; -Original Message-
> From: Peter Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 7:42 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: The lens that Pentax SHOULD have made...
>
>
> Well it's a Canon so it's like a cheesy j lens by default, ot
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 7:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The lens that Pentax SHOULD have made...
> Pentax probably COULD have made a lens similar to the Canon's non "L"
glass
> zoom
If they did i would hope it was considerably better th
On 03.2.27 7:58 PM, "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not to mention that they did say that they were going to be releasing some
> newer lenses in the Fall for the DSLR.
Hi,
Didn't they also say, when the first DSLR news broke from Japan and UK, that
there would be wide angle lense
on 2/27/03 11:41 AM, Mark Roberts at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm probably not alone in my disappointment that Pentax's new 18-35 zoom
> is a cheesy "J" lens with an aperture of 4.0-5.6, but it makes it even
> worse to see something like this:
>
> 17-40mm zoom
> Constant f/4.0 aperture
> Canon
> I've been considering how the great FA300/4.5 will become a very
> nice, very portable medium-long wildlife lens. (450mm, and
> wonderful wide open)
And the F* version will be even nicer - that tripod mount difference
between the F* and the FA* will seem even more important at 450mm,
right?
Fre
The price of the Canon 4/17-40 in Frace of about 1350 Euro which means a
street price of 800-1000 /$
I hope the Pentax 18.-35 will be around 300 Euro.
As the Canon has a 1.6 factor the resulting focal length will be 27 to 64
The Pentax will be a 27 to 53
Maybe the Pentax offer is not so bad as
17 matches
Mail list logo
