I own one of these and it's a fantastic lens. If you can find a good one for a reasonable price I'm sure you will be delighted with it.

/Ian

I had been expecting a 11-16mm based on the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 ATX to be announced. Not this time round I guess.

/Ian

I have an SFX. Bought it new in 1989 with a 50mm lens. I have always thought it an ugly duckling and have never liked the styling of the F series lenses much either, but that said it have been a very reliable camera over the years and I have had some great results. They cost next to nothing on ebay these days too.

/Ian

Well done. I noticed that lens at Ffordes a few days ago and came very close to purchasing it myself. In the end I decided to pass it by though, as I am trying to save up for both the 31 & 77 limiteds. Not cheap !

/Ian

I have not forgotten that little feature and I really miss it when using older lenses on the K10. Still if you look at it the other way its one of the factors that makes using older SLR cameras once in a while so enjoyable.

Do you have the dedicated ME-F 35-70 lens too ?

/Ian

I think if I was a wealthy man I would have a collection of classic cars to take out at the weekend. Austin-Healey 3000, E-type Jag, etc. etc. However I am not, but I do have a collection of film camera's that I like to take out once in a while. Mostly my Super A, but sometimes my SFX and P30n come out too. I like them all for different reasons, but for me the Super A is top of the heap. All that said the K10D is our family work horse, and gets used 99% of the time.

Cheers,

/Ian

My dream lens ?

These days there are some very good super zooms for DSLRs that cover wide angle to long tele, but there does not seem to be an equivalent for extreme wide angle to short tele. For example a 12-50mm. I can only assume that such a lens would be very difficult to design, but I am curious if any of you out there with an understanding of optics can explain what the limiting factors are. I know zoom lens design is constantly evolving, but could we ever see a lens with a coverage of 12-50mm that does not compromise quality, or is it simply impossible ? Today we have both the excellent 12-24mm and 16-45mm. I think my dream lens would be combination of the two.

Cheers,

/Ian

Just like to say I've followed your camera rebuild with great interest and feel a little inspired to have a go myself. Got a couple of candidates at home in need of a little tender loving care. My late fathers Program A, and his tamron 28-70 zoom. The mirror cushioning foam has all fallen to pieces, so it needs replacing and the camera needs a good clean. I guess it would be a good idea to change the light seals at the same time. The zoom is so loose if feels like it will fall apart at any moment. I remember when he bought it back in the 80's it was a well regarded lens, but his particular example was not a good one.

Anyway, congratulations on restoring a great camera.

/Ian.

Just to go back to my original post. I purchased a Pentax-A 35-105mm lens and I have to say it is truly a magnificent piece of engineering. Works well on the K10D, and has a very useful macro setting across the whole range. Thanks for the good advice.

/Ian

The old Pentax-A 28-80mm 1:3.5-4.5 zoom often comes in for quite a lot of criticism. I have read quite a few comments about poor build quality and soft images. However I never realised before, there have been several different versions of this lens, and I was wondering if these general comments apply to all versions.

It seems between 1984 & 1988 there was a non smc "TAKUMAR-A" version. Then between 1989 & 1994 it appears the same lens (well comparing the specifications on Bojidar Dimitrov's excellent web site anyway), was marketed as a non smc "PENTAX-A" lens.

However between 1986-1988 there was a "SMC PENTAX-A" version with a completely different optical formula, this time with 12 elements in 9 groups, as apposed to 8 elements in 8 groups, and of course the famed SMC coating.

On paper at least it would seem the "SMC PENTAX-A" version would perhaps have been better, but I was wondering if anyone on the forum who has owned one could confirm or deny this ?

My interest is I have a small, but growing collection of A series lenses, and in the past have never considered buying the 28-80, mainly due to its reported poor performance. However if the SMC coated version was better I'll keep my eyes open for one. Two changed hands on ebay over the weekend, so they are out there !

Cheers,

/Ian