It'd probably work but I don't recall reading this as a recommended method.

Also, there is probably more 'blowing' power at close range out of a purpose made blower like a Giottos Rocket than a vacuum cleaner can 'suck' from a distance. A combination of the two might be ideal. Get the dust airborne with a Rocket blower, then suck it up with a vacuum cleaner.

Daniel

excellent photo. Is the second one a crop of the first one?

Your eyesight must be very good to get the focussing just right. I recently bought the SMCPF 100mm Macro lens and took some shots of a jumping spider recently. Quite comical with its relatively huge eyes. I used a ringflash but made the mistake of using a too high ISO setting so the results are a bit grainy.

I'm in the process of constructing a dual flash macro rig using 2 x AF240T flashguns. I have most of the bits I need now . . . except the time to make it.

A ring flash might work for you and I can recommend the Vivitar 6000AF Pentax dedicated version. It works very well with the istD anyway.

Macro Photography is a fascinating subject.

You need to be more specific about which sport(s) you want to shoot. Outdoor or indoor? Close-up or long distance? High speed action or slow?

The FA 80-320 is an excellent lens but if you want to shoot relatively dimly lit , indoor, longish distance, high-speed action - that lens probably will not be fast enough to stop the action and record a correct exposure.

So, what sports are you interested in photographing ?

Hi,

I think this kind of damage is usually excluded from warranty claims. If you bought the camera on a credit card you may have some claim on insurance if it is not covered by any other insurance you may have. Maybe your travel insurance can help.

Regards, Pete Smith.

Get the lens cleaner out John and sort out your glasses. There are two shots taken with a 'DS' and the kit lens.

Agreed, the 'DS' shot of the First National Bank on the above comparison page simply looks out of focus to me and not necessarily a fault of the camera or lens.

Get the lens cleaner out John and sort out your glasses. There are two shots taken with a 'DS' and the kit lens.

Agreed, the 'DS' shot of the First National Bank on the above comparison page simply looks out of focus to me and not necessarily a fault of the camera or lens.

Kim, what makes the lens a 'Super' Takumar. The lens I have makes no mention of 'Super'. It is engraved "TAKUMAR (BAYONET) 1:2.5 135mm serial no. ASAHI OPTICAL CO."

The Super-A has gone off to Robin for a full service and seal change, together with an old SMCPKA 50mm 1:1.7 lens who's aperture ring refuses to move. I'll follow your advice and send the 135mm lens for cleaning in the new year. In the meantime I've just got hold of a SMCPKA 135mm 1:2.8 lens on eBay so I'll use that for a while.

Thanks for your help, once again.

Hi,

I have a Takumar 1:2.5 135mm lens that seems to be in perfect optical condition. There is evidence of oil on the diaphragm however. I have seen mention of this before but I cannot decide if it is a real (as opposed to cosmetic) problem. I understand that if the oil reaches the glass, then there is a problem.

Your opinions and knowledge would be appreciated.

Regards, Pete Smith.

I decided to leave it to the pro's. The camera is now at Pentax Camera Repairs - Direct (formerly Harrow Technical) where it will receive a full service, and have the seals and mirror buffer replaced for £56.00 all incl. A bargain I reckon as it'll give it a few more years of life.

Whilst I love my *ist D, the Super-A was my first 'proper' camera. My original one died recently and I got hold of this one. It's still a joy to use 20 years on.

Thanks to all for your informed responses.