Search results for 'back focus' - page 993
Sigma macro for K-x
I presume you mean this, Trixie: Providing it is the K-mount version, it will work with your K-x (Av mode) focussing will be entirely manual: not necessarily a bad thing but something you need to be aware of. If the crop factor of the K-x sensor is taken into account (approximately 1.5x), it wi...
Posted by trixie on 19/08/2011 - 17:45
An open Letter to Ricoh
In fact you can get an AF Pentax FA 50/1.4 for about £200 Where? And what warranty does it have? Ebay. I paid just over £200 for mine. I've never had a problem with any of the lenses I've bought off Ebay***. Maybe I've been lucky. The feedback of the sellers seem to give some kind of Guarant...
Posted by Smeggypants on 20/08/2011 - 00:56
An open Letter to Ricoh
Points taken Smeggy. Ebay feed back is all you can go on and is usually reliable. I know we can use lenses going back to decades, but, with the aid of adaptors (and some IQ loss) so can other brands. It was browsing SRS and seeing a Nikon 50mm f1.8 lens for £115 and 28mmf2.8 for £240 that m...
Posted by Hardgravity on 20/08/2011 - 06:44
An open Letter to Ricoh
I think Pentax should stop making those DA-L lenses and just make proper DA lenses, they aren't that much more expensive and they at least have a hood and quick-shift. 2 things that i really want. And yes, a 70-200 f/2.8 would be nice - people do actually want the field of view this will given t...
Posted by MarkTaylor on 20/08/2011 - 09:51
An open Letter to Ricoh
I voted no. I think yes as a business decision for Pentax, but personally I find the old primes a pleasure to use. I find catch in focus a good alternative to autofocus for the manual lenses - in fact often preferable.
Posted by DrOrloff on 20/08/2011 - 10:16
An open Letter to Ricoh
And 55-200 has become the 'classic focal length' for a second kit lens on ASP-C. No surprise people upgrading from kit lenses look for something with a similar range. The Sigma and Tamron 70-200s F/2.8s are popular for a reason too and the fact that the 60-250 is an F/4 does make a difference. Penta...
Posted by Anvh on 20/08/2011 - 10:34
An open Letter to Ricoh
[quote:3496ace15f="MarkTaylor"] Plastic mounts, no hoods, no quick shift, no aperture ring? I can live with that on a cheap lens if the IQ is up there, and Pentax can certainly deliver on that front. I have been considering the da 35 and have come to the conclusion that it is just too many "no gos" ...
Posted by Joe S on 20/08/2011 - 14:11
An open Letter to Ricoh
I am not sure why people keep asking for zoom lenses that Pentax already makes. A long time ago Pentax decided to make equivalent field of view (eFOV) lenses; thus the DA*50-135 and DA*60-250 do the trick. If you don't want to keep comparing back to film focal lengths fine... forget all about equiva...
Posted by rparmar on 20/08/2011 - 14:19
An open Letter to Ricoh
And 55-200 has become the 'classic focal length' for a second kit lens on ASP-C. No surprise people upgrading from kit lenses look for something with a similar range. The Sigma and Tamron 70-200s F/2.8s are popular for a reason too and the fact that the 60-250 is an F/4 does make a difference. Penta...
Posted by MarkTaylor on 20/08/2011 - 17:47
An open Letter to Ricoh
I've pretty much got into the swing of accepting a focal length for what it is and without doing quick calculations to consider what "equivelent" length I'm getting, in fact if I ever go back to using one of my film bodies I'll probably trying to do the math in reverse and calculate how much shorter...
Posted by fatspider on 21/08/2011 - 09:40
An open Letter to Ricoh
So it maybe better to use "Full Frame" as the reference phrase and always include "field of view" in the statement. Oh no please don't use full-frame... Full frame means you use the full frame of a standard size and since APS-C is a standard size you can say they are full frame as well. Also FOV...
Posted by Anvh on 21/08/2011 - 11:20
An open Letter to Ricoh
Well no Anvh, full frame in dslr terms is accepted to mean (oddly enough) a sensor the same size as a 35mm negative 36x24mm. The term Full Frame originated (I think) in the film business where it meant using the full 35mm frame in filming. I'm confused about how field of view can be affected by...
Posted by Steep on 21/08/2011 - 11:49
An open Letter to Ricoh
To go back to the original poster. I would be surprised if we did not have a couple more budget DA-L primes before long. The DAL 35/2.4 has been well received. The idea of offering a modern version of the classic " wide / normal / tele " trio seems to make sound financial sense. I voted yes anyw...
Posted by mph555l on 22/08/2011 - 08:49
Tamron or Sigma 70-200 f2.8. Which?
Going away for a week. When I come back I think I will be buying either the or the both are £599. I'd be grateful for opinions on both. Which should I buy?
Posted by Blythman on 19/08/2011 - 10:24
Tamron or Sigma 70-200 f2.8. Which?
Well back from my break. Thanks for all the comments. Given the views on here the Tamron clearly seems to be the one to go for. Have also checked the reviews of the older Sigma as per Mike's post. Wish I'd had the cash when he was selling. Might hang on a little while and see what becomes availab...
Posted by Blythman on 28/08/2011 - 11:13
Tamron or Sigma 70-200 f2.8. Which?
Going away for a week. When I come back I think I will be buying either the or the both are £599. I'd be grateful for opinions on both. Which should I buy? What other lenses do you have as I found that there are potentially major differences between brands - such as the positions of the control...
Posted by jeallen01 on 31/08/2011 - 19:31
Tamron or Sigma 70-200 f2.8. Which?
:cry: As you may guess, my preference is for Sigma - and I am with Mike-P on the subject of the early non-HSM Sigma 70-200 F2.8. My is s/h, bought about 3yrs ago from Mifsuds, and it's so sharp - I love it! (only used less now that I have the 100-300mm F4 and use that for airshows - but that is a f...
Posted by jeallen01 on 31/08/2011 - 19:56
Please help me with a dilema
Good afternoon you good people. I would be extremeyl grateful if you were to help me with a dilema. As some of you might have read in another post, I dropped and broke my DA* 16-50 lens a few days back - I had bought it from SRS a few months ago and the extended warranty will run till March 2013. M...
Posted by NaimKhan on 19/08/2011 - 14:13
Please help me with a dilema
I wonder... If you were to take the insurance money you will get the cost of the lens (normally from Comet/Currys) less £250. They wouldn't normally ask for the old lens back as it has no value to them. You sell the old lens as is (faulty) on eBay. So the cost of a new one is £250 less tha...
Posted by greynolds999 on 19/08/2011 - 15:40
Please help me with a dilema
I'd be tempted to take the money! Tempting, but would it affect future premiums? I have to admit a certain degree of cynnicism towards such things, but I can't help feeling that despite all the 'protected no claims bonus' marketing, the insurer will end up getting their money back somehow. There...
Posted by sorted78 on 19/08/2011 - 16:20
