All Forum Comments
Do let me know about the bellows. Thanks, K.
Comment by womble posted on Lenses and accessories for sale at 01/11/2009 - 14:15
I bought it mainly with a view to selling it for a profit but I am going to try it out for a bit first. It is a heavy bit of glass, and the rear element is huge!
The MG is in good nick and has cleaned up nicely. The seals need changing but that is all and the case is in excellent condition.
K.
The MG is in good nick and has cleaned up nicely. The seals need changing but that is all and the case is in excellent condition.
K.
Comment by womble posted on Ultra fast 50. at 01/11/2009 - 13:06
Looking at Bojidar's website the only difference between the K and A versions appears to be in weight (and the A setting of course). The optical formula is the same. Anyone know if they are essentially the same lens?
K.
K.
Comment by womble posted on Ultra fast 50. at 01/11/2009 - 10:42
hefty1 wrote:
PentaxRocks wrote:
Here we go this is what I've found in the box so far, and it's hugh....
645N body
and the 645 lenses are as follows these are the details straight of the lenses so,
Pentax A 645 1:3.5 150mm
Pentax P FA 645 macro 1:4 120mm
Pentax A 645 1:2.8 55mm
Also a Pentax K for 645 lens adaptor.
I'll give you £100 to take them all straight off your hands. You don't want to be messing around with all that antiquated and heavy MF stuff so I'd be doing you a favour really... Here we go this is what I've found in the box so far, and it's hugh....
645N body
and the 645 lenses are as follows these are the details straight of the lenses so,
Pentax A 645 1:3.5 150mm
Pentax P FA 645 macro 1:4 120mm
Pentax A 645 1:2.8 55mm
Also a Pentax K for 645 lens adaptor.
Comment by womble posted on Pentax M 50mm f1.7 at 30/10/2009 - 17:19
We await the K7 Super in time honoured Pentax tradition
Comment by womble posted on Sensor shootout, K7 vs K-X at 30/10/2009 - 16:37
Personally I would stick with the 170-500, seems a good lens to me if those photographs are anything to go by.
K.
K.
Comment by womble posted on SIGMA 50-500 EX DG at 28/10/2009 - 18:52
Just had a quick play. At f/1.2 the depth of field is unsurprisingly very thin but the lens is also very soft. Not too sure it is usable wide open unless for impressionistic shots. By f/5.6 however it seems very sharp indeed. The lens is in excellent nick, I am glad to say. Until it arrived I was a little concerned!
K.
K.
Comment by womble posted on Ultra fast 50. at 28/10/2009 - 14:29
mowog wrote:
Whenever I see a 50 f1.2 lens on ebay, I watch it. Not because I want to buy one, but just to see what it fetches. I am constantly amazed at the prices they go for. £300+ is not unusual...
Admittedly I haven't been keeping my ebay database up to date and prices have gone up somewhat lately, but it used to be that the K version went for about £170 and the A version for about £240. A K series lens in rather battered condition went for £155 last night.Whenever I see a 50 f1.2 lens on ebay, I watch it. Not because I want to buy one, but just to see what it fetches. I am constantly amazed at the prices they go for. £300+ is not unusual...
If they have gone up to £300+ I'll be happy as I have just bought a Pentax MG that happened to have a K version 50mm/f1.2 on the front. The seller didn't realise and hadn't mentioned that fact! I was hoping for a Clarky-style bargain but some other bidders had also noticed the 1.2 lens and although it was a little cheaper than I would have expected it wasn't an amazing bargain (although the MG is in nice nick with an excellent ever ready case).
I am going to try it out for a little while before deciding whether to sell it on or not.
Best wishes, Kris.
Comment by womble posted on Ultra fast 50. at 28/10/2009 - 12:14
Oggy wrote:
...(Notice how I avoided describing it as 'cracking' which has always struck me as an unfortunate turn of phrase :roll
Especially with 16lbs of lead hanging off it....(Notice how I avoided describing it as 'cracking' which has always struck me as an unfortunate turn of phrase :roll
K.
Comment by womble posted on Lens sharpness. at 28/10/2009 - 10:13
I have the 43mm Ltd for those, or my Jupiter-9. I must admit to not using it for much other than macro but for no good reason. I'm just in the habit of putting the lens on for the macro shot then swapping straight back to something else. I'm sure it'll double up fine although your subjects might wish it wasn't quite so sharp!
Cheers, K.
Cheers, K.
Comment by womble posted on FS: Sigma DG EX 50mm f2.8 Macro at 28/10/2009 - 09:52
