Thanks George,

That bit I did already know but that information is not always given as part of the description on auction sites and you can't always see the SMC in photo's.

Cheers, Pete.

Mac,

If your are perhaps considering the Vivitar lens, which is a little faster but manual aperture only, http://www.robertstech.com/vivitar.htm should prove useful. It was, and still is, a highly regarded lens if you can find the right version. The clue to which one is in the first 2 digits of the serial number, as you will see when you follow the link.

I too use a Super-A (same camera as the Super Program) and have done since 1983/84. It is a brilliant piece of kit, I think it's perhaps the best of the ME bodied Pentax's. My original camera developed a fault in the shutter release electronics which couldn't be fixed and I've recently acquired another which I've had serviced and it works great. My VS1 70-210mm is mounted on it now, just waiting for some decent weather. I also have a MZ-S a, *istD and *istDS (actually I don't have the DS any more . . . my son refuses to let me have it back, he's hooked).

Happy hunting, Pete Smith.

Hi all,

Could I have your informed opinions of the relative merits of the above 2 lenses please as I need to decide which one to go with. I'll use them mostly on my *ist D. I have the VS1 lens at the moment and I'm quite happy with it, but would the Pentax-A version produce better overall results? My VA1 (according to the serial number, is a version 2 lens made by Tokina, one of the better versions it seems).

The main difference is that my VS1 has only manual aperture settings but is a bit faster, unlike the Pentax lens which has the 'A' setting. Both appear to be fixed aperture across their zoom range.

Info: (This took me a while to discover so I thought I'd share it here). For anyone looking for a Pentax-A 70-200'ish mm zoom lens having fixed aperture throughout its zoom range beware (if you don't know already) there are 2 similar lenses. One is a Pentax-A 70-200mm 1:4, the other is Pentax-A 70-210mm 1:4. Only the 70-210mm has the SMC coating, the 70-200mm does not.

Don't tell me, everyone else in the Pentax world, except me, new that already, right?

Anyway, your opinion about my original question would be appreciated.

Regards, Pete Smith.

A torch springs to mind

That's gotta be much too simple . . . but I can't think why it wouldn't work.

Thanks Liam, I'll try it out next week and see what happens.

I used my bellows 'K' unit on my DS once and I don't remember any issues with it, except that noted above.

I was bitterly disappointed however to discover that the bellows can not be used with my MZ-S. The camera body is too deep and it fouls on the bellows body.

I have been very tempted to take an angle grinder to the bellows and remove enough metal from the offending part for it to fit, but I can't bring myself to do it.

Sounds like your treading the same path that most of us have trod (or is it treaded).

Somebody once said that it's only after we die that our wives find out how much we really spent on our photo gear . . . but by then we've had our fun, right. Of course, if they find out before, divorce seems to be a popular option.

Any of the Limited lenses are truly awesome hunks of glass but my personal opinion is that the 16-45mm DA lens is a pretty good compromise, still expensive, but arguably more versatile and it covers your 35mm focal length requirement. Then again, your 18-55mm kit lens covers the 35mm range and is the 16-45mm that much better to justify replacing. I have no doubt that if we had to buy one or the other of these two zooms, most on this forum would opt for the 16-45mm for its superior performance but I know I would have difficulty justifying that one to my interior minister (my wife).

There is still some very good Pentax glass to be had on eBay and other sources and prices seem to be on an upward trend but there are also some very desireable used third party lenses about too. I actually like some of the newer Sigma glass. I have a 75-300mm Macro Zoom which produces phenominal results in macro and a 135-400mm APO Zoom which is equally stunning.

I guess at the end of the day, we all have very slightly different requirements of our lenses from one another. I for one will keep buying. trying, then selling the ones I don't want to keep . . . as long as my interior minister doesn't find out . . . that is.

Have a look at / listen to this excellent site.

http://www.tipsfromthetopfloor.com/page/3/

tfttf75 in particular explains why some of your snow scenes might be underexposed.

Chris has a unique pocasting style but the content is first rate.

Regards, Pete Smith.

Yet another model added to the bottom end of the DSLR lineup

http://www.pentax.co.jp/english/news/2006/200603.html

WHY, WHY, WHY ? ? ?

There surely can't be anything left to prove at the bottom end of the market. I don't understand why The Pentax design team are not focussing (no pun intended) at the top end of their market to add features to their digital SLR's.

The *ist D is a fine camera that is well overdue for a software revamp to make it an even better tool. In my view, the *ist D hardware package is about as good as it needs to be. With a serious rethink of its firmware it could be much better. The features 'wishlist' is documented well enough elsewhere on this forum.

Please Mr. Pentax (Japan), no more digital toys and more digital tools.

Just my luck, I've got Whisky, Gin, Brandy, a bottle of that sweet sticky orange liqueur stuff, copious amounts of fine spanish wine & beer . . . but no vodka. I'm diminished to a squinting wreck, and the winter olympics are on telly tonight too.

Never mind, I got my winder working so I guess it was worth it.

Cheers, Pete.

Note to self: Add vodka to shopping list.