r shots without ever changing my position or the subject framing.
Jens Bladt
Arkitekt MAA
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 10. september 2005 13:53
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF
Tokin
t
Arkitekt MAA
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 10. september 2005 13:53
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF
Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF
I got this from a PDMLer, but with one caveat.
Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF
I got this from a PDMLer, but with one caveat.
Then I got the 80-400, so this has sat in its box and I've hardly touched it.
So it should go.
It's the AF version.
Here's the caveat:
The zoom ring has some play, so you simply keep it pulled back w
F> I've heard that the Tamron is quite nice (although I'm quite happy
F> enough with my AT-X 80-200/2.8). The only thing that keeps me from
F> the Tamron Adaptall 2 lenses is the Ka version of the mount - while
F> I've found the K version to be quite rugged and foolproof (as in
F> "Fred-proof") to
- Original Message -
From: "J. C. O'Connell"
Subject: RE: Tokina 80-200/2.8
> I had the AT-X 80-200 F2.8 MF for a while in PK. Yes it is a very
nice
> lens but the Tamron Adaptall 80-200 f2.8 MF is even nicer. Better
build,
> even sharper but slightly larger. I
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
> is awfully big fo carry-around. In that range a more compact
> f4 lens I find more suitable.
And that's me at a full circle. I know of no AF lens at this aperture
for Pentax. Except perhaps the SMC-F 70-210 and perhaps the new Sigma
with the extra
I gave one (manual focus) a whirl a couple of years ago.
It's optically excellent, except perhaps @ 2.8 where it is
a bit soft. For the price (often under $200 with paint wear)
it's a bargain as it's 99% as good as the $1k camera-branded
lenses.
I got rid of it for a simple functionality matter
Kostas,
I had the AF 80-200mm ATX-Pro (which a fellow PDML'er now owns :-(
)...and while it is a great lens in its own right (sharp, well built,
good AF) etc, they are not SMC lenses, and cannot be expected to perform
to the same standards. The flare control on the Tokina lenses though is
gener
On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 19:29:16 -0400, Mat Maessen wrote:
> H... anyone have recommendations for a decent tripod that'll support
> this lens, or my Sigma 400/5.6? Bonus if it'll support a decent-sized MF
> camera/lens as well.
Don't know about tripods, but my Bogen 3218 monopod with 3262 ball
I have considered purchasing the Pentax 80-200 2.8 for a while now, but the $1350
price, while I'm sure fair, isn't pocket change. Tokina's 80-200 can be had from the
NYC dealers for about $599, and there is a $60 rebate available, bringing the cost to
$540 or so. My question is this: Should I s
10 matches
Mail list logo
