PM Sent...

Peter

I have just taken delivery of an MZ-6 from SRS.

It came well packaged and promptly delivered, so no hesitation in recommending them to prospective purchasers.


Peter

Thanks all for your comments.

We often hear about the reduced image circle cast by digital lenses, so I am a little confused by HG's suggestion of using the DA18-55 on a film body.

Over how wide a range of focal lengths is it possible to get an image from, using a digital lens on a film body?

I presume this capability applies to digital zooms only (i.e. not primes).

By the way, has anybody tried the Tamron 28-80?

Peter

Dear All,

Can anyone comment on the relative merits of the Pentax 28-80s (numerous incarnations, mainly second hand, though I think FAJ versions might be available??) and the TAMRON 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 ASL PAF version (available as new).

I am not too sure about e-bay so new appeals.

I want it for a S/H MZ6 body, but also for those focal lengths on my K10D.


Thanks

Or should it read "substitute"?


Err....sorry

Thanks all, for your comments to-date.

I suppose I would want something that could accomodate my MF lenses (Rikenon 50mm f2, Tamron 28 & 80-210mm).

Therefore as 'Hardgravity' suggests, this would preclude the MZ30/50/60?

Am I right in thinking that power-zooms are operated by a small lever on the camera body, left to go wide and right to go tele?

If so, I don't suppose that would work on a K10D?


Regards,
Peter

Dear All,

I have been looking (on-line) at the used equipment at SRS, with an interest in 28-80 lenses for use on my K10D.

There are various bodies (MZ-30, MZ-60, MZ-7) with 28-80s for sale. An AF body would be a bonus, to fill in the gap between MF and digital.

First question is without knowing the MZ range, are the higher spec cameras generally the ones with lower numbers and..

second question, are the 28-80s likely to be similar between bodies and are they of good optical quality?


Thanks in advance,

Peter

The relevance is that push-processed film was used to obtain results under "difficult" lighting conditions, which the users accepted.

The grain effects of ISO3200 on dslrs are much less noticeable.

Therefore the high ISO capabilities of the K7 are much better than anyone exposing film at the same ISO was able to achieve? I presume to suggest that the difference between K7 & competitors is much less than between dslr & film.

I never went higher than ISO800 with Ilford (can't remember now, not FP4, the faster one..HP5?). For many, the grain effects of fast film were very much intentional for artistic/atmospheric effect.

As for democratisation of high end photography, there may well be "equality of opportunity" (by making high end dslrs more widely available) but there is by no means "equality of outcome".

My position is.....sat at my desk at work, far too late in the day!

Regards
Peter

I use a K10D and have always been more than happy with 2 GB cards. I find them more than adequate for a days shooting in PEF raw.

Also I worry slightly about card failure, so prefer more smaller cards than one big one!

Regards

I have the f2 (from KR10 Super c1985) and love the sharpness. Prefer it to 18-55 or 50-200 at 50mm.

Feels like a "proper camera" with the 50mm/f2 fitted (probably because I never had a "standard zoom" till K10D).

Happy birthday my K10D, 2 today!


Regards

PGWeber