worth a chuckle:
http://www.emlii.com/images/article/2014/02/5300c7c245f14.jpeg
from
http://www.emlii.com/21201fd/32-Irresistible-Print-Ads-That-Will-Leave-You-Mesmerized-Possibly-Forever
--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
Perhaps pigeons are less common than boobies where he comes from?
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:31 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
worth a chuckle:
http://www.emlii.com/images/article/2014/02/5300c7c245f14.jpeg
from
If its an ad/photo for a wide angle lens, that must have a field of view
greater than 180 degrees...
Bong Manayon
http://bong.manayon.net
On Saturday, March 22, 2014 8:32 AM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
worth a chuckle:
http://www.emlii.com/images/article/2014/02/5300c7c245f14.jpeg
http://themetapicture.com/brilliant-ad/
Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
--
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.
Actually I'd like a mid tele in this situation!
-Original Message-
From: Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com
Subject: OT: Reason to always have a wide angle lens with you
http://themetapicture.com/brilliant-ad/
Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
--
PDML
Agreed. A wide angle lens would exaggerate the proportions of these
already plenteous posteriors.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Kenneth Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
Actually I'd like a mid tele in this situation!
-Original Message-
From: Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com
Sir, a pre-owned Pentax 16-50/2.8 or the Tamron 17-50/2.8 should serve
you well. These lenses are tack sharp with excellent contrast and
color. For that occasional tele shot greater than 50 mm get a front
attachment high quality 1.7x Auxiliary Tele Lens. Believe me, I use
one, and you wouldn't be
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Tony Cogan wrote:
I am currently using a Pentax FA28-70 f4 and a Sigma 17-35 F2.8. I
would like to get a single lens that covers this same range;
Is this just for use on a DSLR, or would you also want to use it
on a film body (and if so, on which body
how about the 18-135 WR? I hear it isn't so bad if you don't mind
losing an f-stop or two
cheers
ecke
2011/7/24 John Francis jo...@panix.com:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Tony Cogan wrote:
I am currently using a Pentax FA28-70 f4 and a Sigma 17-35 F2.8. I
would like to get a
At 01:06 PM 7/24/2011, you wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Tony Cogan wrote:
I am currently using a Pentax FA28-70 f4 and a Sigma 17-35 F2.8. I
would like to get a single lens that covers this same range;
Is this just for use on a DSLR, or would you also want to use it
on a
Hello
I've re-subscribed here after a couple of years away. I would
appreciate any input from you.
I'm looking to replace 2 lenses with 1, for simplicity. I'm doing a
lot of shooting at construction projects and I don't like to change
lenses with lots of sawdust, dirt, etc. flying around.
There are two that I know of that fit that bill. The Pentax DA 17-70mm
f4.0 (reviewed at photozone
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/408-pentax_1770_4 ), and the Sigma
17-70mm f2.8~4.5, (also reviewed at photozone
(It was suggested to me to re-post this to be sure it gets a fresh
subject line, so I am re-posting the following:)
Hello
I've re-subscribed here after a couple of years away. I would
appreciate any input from you.
I'm looking to replace 2 lenses with 1, for simplicity. I'm doing a
lot of
On 23/07/2011 2:20 PM, Tony Cogan wrote:
I am currently using a Pentax FA28-70 f4 and a Sigma 17-35 F2.8. I would
like to get a single lens that covers this same range; 17-70-ish. I'd
like something a bit better than the consumer-grade and hopefully in the
$300 to $400 range. What suggestions
Tony, beside two lenses Bill Robb mentioned there is also Sigma
17-70/2.8-4.0 DC OS HSM which is a slightly newer version of their
17-70/2.8-4.5.
I am not sure as to your limits price-wise but I am thinking that the
likes of 17-50/2.8 by Tamron or Sigma might serve you better due to
their
I have the 12-24 and it is a very good lens. Very sharp and contrasty,
and excellent flare resistance. It does have a little vignetting that
is only noticeable if you are doing some heavier-handed PS.
rg
Charles Wilson wrote:
Dear All,
Happy New Year
I'm wondering if anyone has had any
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Wide angle lens Sigma or Pentax
Dear All,
Happy New Year
I'm wondering if anyone has had any experience with these two lenses.
Sigma 10-20 4-5.6
Pentax 12-24 f4
I'm trying to decide between them both and am aware that the sigma is
approximately $400 cheaper
Dear All,
Happy New Year
I'm wondering if anyone has had any experience with these two lenses.
Sigma 10-20 4-5.6
Pentax 12-24 f4
I'm trying to decide between them both and am aware that the sigma is
approximately $400 cheaper in Australia.
I already have the DA 14 lens
Any advice would be
I've discovered a method of very precisely determining lens FL and distortion
parameters and I've been doing some experiments. Here's what I found:
My A16/28 lens is actually closer to 15.94mm in FL :-)
When this lens is used on the *ist D or its brethren (1.53 mag factor) and the
file is
Why not Tamron 'SP AF17-35mm f/2.8-4 DiLD IF'
-Original Message-
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 5:01 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Digital wide angle lens
You're the second person I've heard saying that the DA14 isn't
On 26/1/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
I use the K 15/3.5. It's nose-heavy on every camera I've tried it with
but still excellent.
Hey Mark, you can try the 'arse-heavy' version when you come to England ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
--- Shen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not Tamron 'SP AF17-35mm f/2.8-4 DiLD IF'
I don't know. Why?
Godfrey
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
- Original Message -
From: Peter Smekal
Subject: Digital wide angle lens
Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist
D or
DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?)
Peter
A15/3.5. It isn't particularly ultrawide on the istD.
It's nose heavy
Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or
DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?)
I really don't care how heavy it is but it's got the right mount and it
performs very well [...]
Gee, as the user of a number of larger-aperture and longer
You're the second person I've heard saying that the DA14 isn't
particularly sharp. I'd love to see a solid lens test of this
lens comparing it against others.
I've taken a bunch of pictures with it and they're more than
just satisfactorily sharp, but then I don't have any other
Pentax mount
-
Fra: Peter Smekal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 26. januar 2005 08:01
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Digital wide angle lens
Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or
DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?)
Peter
Peter Smekal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or
DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?)
I use the K 15/3.5. It's nose-heavy on every camera I've tried it with
but still excellent.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography
The same here, my sample is sharp, even at 2.8.
DagT
På 26. jan. 2005 kl. 17.01 skrev Godfrey DiGiorgi:
You're the second person I've heard saying that the DA14 isn't
particularly sharp. I'd love to see a solid lens test of this
lens comparing it against others.
I've taken a bunch of pictures with
On 26 Jan 2005 at 22:38, DagT wrote:
The same here, my sample is sharp, even at 2.8.
I suppose the difference is between sharp and damn sharp.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
På 26. jan. 2005 kl. 23.45 skrev Rob Studdert:
On 26 Jan 2005 at 22:38, DagT wrote:
The same here, my sample is sharp, even at 2.8.
I suppose the difference is between sharp and damn sharp.
Could be, as I never use a tripod I´d probably not notice the last bit
:-)
I did make a 30x40cm print of
, January 26, 2005 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: Digital wide angle lens
The same here, my sample is sharp, even at 2.8.
I suppose the difference is between sharp and damn sharp.
Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or
DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?)
Peter
On 26 Jan 2005 at 8:01, Peter Smekal wrote:
Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or
DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?)
I really don't care how heavy it is but it's got the right mount and it
performs very well, probably better than
William Robb wrote:
Lets see, to get an angle of view that is more or less the same as
the 15mm f/3.5 (the widest rectilinear that Pentax makes for 35mm),
they would need to make a 10mm lens.
I really have my doubts that this is feasable with the 45 or so mm
flange to focal plane distance that the
From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sigma have already made a full-frame 12-24mm zoom - a 10mm prime sounds
tricky but not impossible in my decidedly unexpert opinion :-)
Have you used it? Neither have I. Mostly, because I haven't seen a single review,
saying that it's any good at 12mm.
- Original Message -
From: Mike Ignatiev
Subject: Re[2]: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sigma have already made a full-frame 12-24mm zoom - a 10mm prime
sounds
tricky but not impossible in my decidedly unexpert opinion :-)
Have you
- Original Message -
From: Steve Jolly
Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
It was in the 21st Feb issue of Amateur Photographer (UK), so I'm
afraid there isn't a link to give you.
They printed MTF graphs for five different focal lengths. At 12mm,
the
resolution
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume you are being facetious here?
I don't think that Nikon is wise in allowing other manufacturers to walk
off with their market unless they are in fact being very savvy about the
difficulties of getting good and cheap FF DSLRs. Of course if
On 17 Mar 2004 at 18:54, John Forbes wrote:
That's true. But manufacturers have to take a bet on what they think the
market will want, and plan accordingly.
No one in their right mind could possibly have wanted a digital camera with a
less than full frame sensor which needed new lenses for
On 17 Mar 2004 at 18:54, John Forbes wrote:
That's true. But manufacturers have to take a bet on what they think the
market will want, and plan accordingly.
No one in their right mind could possibly have wanted a digital camera with a
less than full frame sensor which needed new
You are very unhappy about the APS sensor size, and I sympathise with your
feelings on the subject.
However, I think you are letting your emotions blind you to the reality
that Pentax is now committed to that size, and there is very little
prospect of a change. If they really expected to be
: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 6:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
I don't believe Pentax has the resources to support two different dSLR
formats, and the fact that they are bringing out lenses in the APS
format
PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com
-Original Message-
From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 1:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
I
- Original Message -
From: John Forbes
Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
You are very unhappy about the APS sensor size, and I sympathise
with your
feelings on the subject.
The problem with the APS sensor isn't the dimension of it, but the
back focus distance
which means that FF sensors have dropped enough in price that Pentax could
swim.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 1:27 PM
Subject: RE: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
Its not up to pentax
- Original Message -
From: John Forbes
Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
Which is why they are designing new lenses.
New designs aren't likely to be able to go far enough.
Lets see, to get an angle of view that is more or less the same as
the 15mm f/3.5 (the widest
The upcoming 14mm will be f2.8, so I've heard.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 10:16 PM
Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
- Original Message -
From: John Forbes
Subject
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 24mm
lens and
skip the 16-45/4. And I'm still a likely purchaser of the 14.
But just
an hour or two ago I ran across a Sigma 17-35 EX 2.8-4 on ebay
with a
buy it now price of $229. That's half of
Thanks for the feedback Gianfranco. I too would expect it to be flare
prone in some situations. It should be find for what I'll use it for.
Eventually I hope to supplement it with the new 14mm Pentax prime or,
better yet, the A 15/3.5.
Paul
On Mar 16, 2004, at 7:37 AM, Gianfranco Irlanda wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
or,
better yet, the A 15/3.5.
It is still available new, although it is a bit pricey.
William Robb
on 16.03.04 13:52, Paul Stenquist at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eventually I hope to supplement it with the new 14mm Pentax prime or,
better yet, the A 15/3.5.
AFAIK (Dario's test images) A 15/3.5 is only so-so on *istD. Personally I
would opt rather for DA 14/2.8.
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
I seriously doubt we will see a $3000+ Pentax, especially one that goes
after the 35 mm market. I think we'll see 24x36 sensors when the price
drops below $2000.
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL
I think that there is now at least some evidence that Pentax listens to
this list and probably to others as well,
Witness the 1.1 software upgrade, which made K/M lenses useful. If they
do they will think twice about
abandoning the aperture ring. Full frame sensors on dslrs? Well that
On 16 Mar 2004 at 10:32, Christian Skofteland wrote:
What is your time frame? How many years are you going to wait for Pentax to
catch up? Look, I'm happy that they finally released a camera that was
(mostly) the answer to what I was looking for. Is the *ist-D limited in
functionality?
Unfortunately, Canon has apparently suggested that they
are intending to stay with APS-sized sensors for their non-pro
cameras,
and Nikon's expanding DX lens line suggests a similar posture.
So the D1MarkII is non-pro? (1.3x crop).
The EOS1DMarkII is a patch on a first generation camera.
I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 24mm lens and
skip the 16-45/4. And I'm still a likely purchaser of the 14. But just
an hour or two ago I ran across a Sigma 17-35 EX 2.8-4 on ebay with a
buy it now price of $229. That's half of what BH gets for it and about
half of what
Doh, that should have read I had pretty much made up my mind to wait
for the new 14mm lens. What a difference in angle of view a missed
keystroke makes vbg
On Mar 15, 2004, at 9:09 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 24mm lens and
skip the 16-45/4.
angle lens, perhaps something in the 18mm to
20mm range, and would like to hear your recommendations. Money is major
Awhile ago, I was going to purchase one of the Russian lenses for use with
my Pentax. I want to say it was the Mir 47K, but it may have had a
different model number. It was most
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick Wunsch) wrote:
would like to have at least a 20mm angle.
The Tamron SP 17mm f3.5 I bought off eBay recently seems rather good. It's
over US$250 new, but under that s/h.
---
John Dallman [EMAIL
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Patrick Wunsch wrote:
I am looking for a decent wide angle lens, perhaps something in the 18mm to
20mm range, and would like to hear your recommendations. Money is major
Awhile ago, I was going to purchase one of the Russian lenses for use with
my Pentax. I want to say
77mm Skylight filter i am throwing in with
it too. manual focus with A position for those who may want to use it with *ist or
*istD.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Mark Cassino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 09:35
Subject: Re: Wide Angle
Hello,
I am looking for a decent wide angle lens, perhaps something in the 18mm to
20mm range, and would like to hear your recommendations. Money is major
consideration as is quality. I have looked at the Vivitar, Samyang,
Phoenix, Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses. I would like to stay under
Patrick Wunsch:
I am looking for a decent wide angle lens, perhaps something in the 18mm to
20mm range, and would like to hear your recommendations. Money is major
consideration as is quality. I have looked at the Vivitar, Samyang,
Phoenix, Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses. I would like to stay
, you wrote:
PW Hello,
PW I am looking for a decent wide angle lens, perhaps something in the 18mm to
PW 20mm range, and would like to hear your recommendations. Money is major
PW consideration as is quality. I have looked at the Vivitar, Samyang,
PW Phoenix, Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses. I
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Wunsch
Subject: Wide Angle Lens Recommendations?
Hello,
I am looking for a decent wide angle lens, perhaps something in the 18mm
to
20mm range, and would like to hear your recommendations. Money is major
consideration as is quality. I have
Hi, Pat,
I've got the Vivitar 3.8 19mm, and it's certainly not a great lens, but it's a
bad one, either. I think that it's a pretty inexpensive option, compared to
many other ultra-wides.
I'm sure that it's more prone to flare than the Pentax 20mm, but I rarely shoot
into the sun, so haven't
and
brilliance reminiscent of medium format performance.
- Andrew.
-Original Message-
From: zcaballero [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: April 2, 2003 10:25 AM
To: pentax-discuss
Subject: Re: the best 28mm to 30mm wide angle lens produced by pentax
out of the following
28mm 3.5 k
28mm 3.5 m
I have tried the 28 3.5 M, and owned a 28 2.8 M, the first was nice the
second OK, but I really like the 28 2 A. In addition to good
performance I like the shallow DOF. Here´s an example (sorry about the
Norwegian language):
http://www.foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=13611
http://www.foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=13611
Small DOF is OK, but I hate the bokeh :-(
Regards,
£ukasz
http://cgi.ebay.ca/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1330746362
Currently US $180.00
William Robb
-
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
William Robb wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.ca/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1330746362
Currently US $180.00
But the hood that was included with the original lens is not in any of
the pictures is not mentioned in the description, therefore, probably
not included.
--
David S.
Nature and
Regarding the Sigma 20 f1.8, while on my deathbed (off work for a couple
of days with a gastric virus),
On paper it looks OK, although it's got that dreaded autofocus. Do
you know anything more about it than what's on the Sigma web site?
There's no mention that I could find wrt size,
At 06:38 26.9.2001 -0400, you wrote:
How about a nice 20mm f1.4?
Kind regards
Peter
What ? Where ??
Antti-Pekka
---
* Antti-Pekka Virjonen * Fiskarsinkatu 7 D * GSM: +358 400 789753 *
* Computec Oy Turku* FIN-20750 Turku Finland * Fax: +358 2 413 *
-
This message is from the
I will vouch for the reviewers comments on this lens. I have it and it
is extremely sharp. There is absolutely no vigineting at the corners as
is sometimes the case with superwides, and build quality is excellent.
This is one of Sigma's EX series and shares the same metal barrel and
high
Angle lens
Who makes the fastest, rectilinear, K-mount (or adaptable to K-mount)
lens in the 15mm - 21mm or so range? Who makes the fastest one for an
SLR regardless of mount? Thanks!
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List
--- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who makes the fastest, rectilinear, K-mount (or
adaptable to K-mount)
lens in the 15mm - 21mm or so range? Who makes the
fastest one for an
SLR regardless of mount? Thanks!
--
Sigma EX 20/1.8
Andreas Wirtz
-
This message is from the
Thanks, Len, but 2.8 is too slow. Pentax has a 20/2.8 that's far less
expensive, albeit not as wide, but still wide enough for my needs.
Len Paris wrote:
There is a 14mm f/2.8 rectilinear Tamron that is excellent, but pretty
expensive. See BH and Adorama
for pricing.
--
Shel Belinkoff
Thanks, Andreas ...
On paper it looks OK, although it's got that dreaded autofocus. Do
you know anything more about it than what's on the Sigma web site?
There's no mention that I could find wrt size, construction, or
whether or not it contains plastic elements.
Andreas Wirtz wrote:
Who
I would think that wide open lens performance and flatness of field would be
as important at speed.
Thanks, Len, but 2.8 is too slow. Pentax has a 20/2.8 that's far less
expensive, albeit not as wide, but still wide enough for my needs.
--
Shel Belinkoff
-
This message is from the
, 2001 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: Fastest Super Wide Angle lens
Thanks, Len, but 2.8 is too slow. Pentax has a 20/2.8 that's far less
expensive, albeit not as wide, but still wide enough for my needs.
Len Paris wrote:
There is a 14mm f/2.8 rectilinear Tamron that is excellent, but pretty
expensive
Len wrote:
Remember that polarizers on wide angle lenses can give strange
results because of the angle of view, especially on scenics or
landscapes showing a lot of sky ...
this is correct - you will get shades of blue-darkening
across the wide expanse of sky = rather
On 5 Jun 2001, at 15:43, Patrick Genovese wrote:
First, let me thank all who replied to my post for the great feedback.
Since I like using filters esp my circular polariser a non rotating front
element is highly desirable. I know that the sigma 20mm and the 17-35
both have non rotating
snip
Don't forget that filters suitable for such wide angle lenses may be obscenely expensive. I am lucky and am
able to use the Cokin P system filters on my A24/2.8, even though Cokin quotes them as being able to go as wide as 28mm only. I don't get any noticable vignetting at about f/11 or
Francis Tang wrote:
I am lucky and am able to use the Cokin P system filters on my A24/2.8,
even though Cokin quotes them as being able to go as wide as 28mm only.
I don't get any noticable vignetting at
about f/11 or f/16 but I haven't really used filters on that lens at
wider apertures.
kelvin writes:
re: 14mm, I find that 20mm is the widest that I could ever find a practical
use for... and 24mm was probably more useful 50% of the time, anyway.
Hence , I think the uses for a 14mm (which I borrowed several times) is
too limited for consideration unless you already have a
guess the best compromise for versatility, quality and economy might
be the Vivitar AND the Pentax 24mm.
Rob Brigham
-Original Message-
From: kelvin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 04 June 2001 20:37
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Wide Angle Lens Dilemma
I think all the options you have
One of my favourites has been the Tokina 17mm RMC.
In fact I have had 2 of these - the first was stolen in Fiji along with the rest
of my gear. It is manual focus, but who needs af on a wide angle
lens!
Bob
First, let me thank all who replied to my post for the great feedback.
Since I like using filters esp my circular polariser a non rotating front element is highly desirable. I know that the sigma 20mm and the 17-35 both have non rotating front elements. But don't couldnt find the relevant info
Rob Brigham wrote:
snip
The Vivitar Series 1 19-35mm zoom is about a third the price again and is pretty good
if you are on a real budget (doesnt sound like you are though). It really is very
good and very underpriced. Also has flare problems as do all non SMC lenses to a
degree.
unsnip
I
, anyway.
Hence , I think the uses for a 14mm (which I borrowed several times) is
too limited for consideration unless you already have a lens in the 20-24mm
range.
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 19:42:12 +0200
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Wide Angle Lens Dilemma
This is a multipart message in MIME
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
I have the manual focus Sigma 24mm f2.8 macro, and I am quite happy with
it. The minimum focus distance is really phenomenal and wonderful to
have, even though I don't use it for super-close stuff very often.
...and I posted that four or five days ago. Whee!
-Aaron
wrote:
I
have been saving up to buy a good ultra wide angle lens. Below is
my shortlist (in no particular order).
- PENTAX SMC-FA 20-35mm f/4
AL
- PENTAX SMC-FA 20mm f/2.8
- SIGMA 20mm f/1.8 EX DG
Aspherical RF
- SIGMA 14mm f2.8 EX
Aspherical
- SIGMA 17-35mm f2.8-4 EX
Aspherical
Since
I recently bought the PENTAX SMC-FA 20-35mm f/4 AL and LOVE it. The
contrasty, full-frame sharpness, and distortion-free images have been
phenomenal. The lens also handles well, and is relatively small. Yeah, it's
f/4, but the one-stop loss vs. size is often handy.
It is, without a doubt, one
Hi,
Patrick White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been thinking of getting a wide angle lens (28mm or less)
I can use for macro shots. Anyone have any recommendations
for what would be a good choice?
Vivitar 2.8/28 macro and 2.8/24 macro are good ones. I have the
28, it has only an 1:5
Jaros3aw Brzeziñski wrote:
As far as I know 24mm f/2.8 Sigmas have always been very good performers with
excellent
close-up focusing ability.
I have the manual focus Sigma 24mm f2.8 macro, and I am quite happy with
it. The minimum focus distance is really phenomenal and wonderful to
.
I've been thinking of getting a wide angle lens (28mm or less) I
can use
for macro shots. Anyone have any recommendations for what
would be a good
choice?
Does using an extension tube change the angle of view? (does
it still have
a 28mm perspective?)
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
Hi all,
I've been thinking of getting a wide angle lens (28mm or less) I can use
for macro shots. Anyone have any recommendations for what would be a good
choice?
thanks,
patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED])
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe
I have the M28/3.5 and the FA28/2.8 and neither of them gets particularly close
but I just use an extension tube and find that works well.
Mark Roberts
Patrick White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been thinking of getting a wide angle lens (28mm or less) I can use
for macro shots
As far as I know 24mm f/2.8 Sigmas have always been very good performers with
excellent
close-up focusing ability. Otherwise use a thinnest available extension tube with any
wide-angle lens and you'll be pretty OK.
---
Za³ó
I have the M28/3.5 and the FA28/2.8 and neither of them gets particularly
close
but I just use an extension tube and find that works well.
Mark Roberts
Patrick White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been thinking of getting a wide angle lens (28mm or less) I
can use
for macro shots. Anyone
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
