Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 21, 2007, 10:35 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

After a couple of days panicking... (The mail had lost track of the box!!!!) I recieved my bucket today.

Can't say that the lenses are in good shape... they are pristine! Can't have had much use since they were bought (1990, the guy even sent the original purchase receits).

Only thing that wasn't as stated was the polarizer - it was an ordinary UV filter. I can live with that.:G

And tomorrow's midsummer eve... life is on the bright side right now.

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2007, 11:13 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
CyberCoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 257
Default

Fantastic news, Kjell. Sounds like Christmas came very early this year with the St Nick discount
CyberCoyote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2007, 11:48 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
After a couple of days panicking... (The mail had lost track of the box!!!!) I recieved my bucket today.

Can't say that the lenses are in good shape... they are pristine! Can't have had much use since they were bought (1990, the guy even sent the original purchase receits).

That would have been my guess -- anyone who had that particular collection of glass probably appreciated what he had and took care of it.

Only thing that wasn't as stated was the polarizer - it was an ordinary UV filter. I can live with that.:G

uhoh -- well you got ripped -- send the whole kit to me! I-- I'll pay the postage:-)

And tomorrow's midsummer eve... life is on the bright side right now.

A final Congrats on the find -- You'll have some fun playing for a while now


Kjell
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2007, 11:54 AM   #14
TDN
Senior Member
 
TDN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,288
Default

Kjell, you picked a good time to sell these. Looks like people are very keen on getting some new glass before their summer holiday

My takumar 135 (the "paperweight", according to some) just went for 82 euros.

Tom
TDN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2007, 3:18 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

The 1.7 AF TC is the real deal there, although I really don't use mine that much, but when I do it works perfectly. The only dog in the bunch is the Pentax SFX-N (SF1-n), which was a good but not great AF Pentax film camera.

Congratulations!

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2007, 4:14 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

Tom, if I remember right you have both the FA* 300 4.5 and the A* 200 f2.8+1.7 TC.

I don't doubt that the FA* is the preferable, for size weight and IQ. But how do they compare? Would you use them on the same day on the same side of the moon? My hope is to soften my LBA and urge for a FA* with the 200+TC combo.

The SFX will go sooner rather than later. Any centI get I consider a bonus. Think I'll sell the 50 1.7 too (100 USD?)(got a FA 1.4) and willtake some time to decide wether to sell or keep the Pentax 28. (60?) The Tokina goes for what it sells at. The little zoom will go (30USD+?) The 70-210 is a keeper, if I sell one it'll be my other sample since it's in less pristine condition. (100?) The tripod seems to be HQ for a lighter combo, might do for lenses up to 200 mm. Maybe I'll keep it, maybe sell. I don't know if there is any second hand market for "normal" tripods.

All in all I think I'll get back what I paid and a few nice things formy bag. BTW, is there any market for used bags in good condition? The Hama was a shoulder bag for a body + 3-4 lenses and acessories. I don't need it, I like my DIY better.

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2007, 7:49 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi Kjell,

If you don't mind, I'll add my .02 here, as I have both the FA*300/4.5 and the A*200/2.8 as well as the 1.7x AFA. I almost always have a 1.7x on one or both of my bodies. This might not help your LBA though. . .:-)

In choosing what to carry, I usually look at the weather report and conditions that I can see -- and decide whether I might need really fast, in addition to reach, keeping portability in mind.

The A*200 with the 1.7x gives me really fast, with moderate reach for when it's overcast. A perfect example woud be the zoo, where the animals are larger, relatively slow moving or static, and I can use both the extra focusing speed and reach for outside, and the extra lens speed for indoor stuff that's a lot closer. The combo works very well. As an alternative, I also have a Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 LD which I've found to be very sharp and it gives me a range of FLs (136-340) to play with. The A*200 is a better lens (just:-)), but the zoom is nice for its versatility.

But the 1.7x also adds versatility to the FA*300. Despite the claims that you need a max aperture of f2.8 or faster, it works well with the FA*300 on all but the gloomier overcast days, and gives a very light (about 1kg), relatively easily handholdable 510mm f7.7. I know it sounds slow, but I was pleasantly surprised by some of the results even at ISO 800, with shutter speeds between 1/100, and 1/200, wide open, and it's much easier to hold reasonably than the Tamron SP500/8 mirror, or any other optical lens at that FL. Usable ISO 800 and 1600 in a pinch smashes the paradigm for how fast a lens you need for a situation when compared to film.

The 1.7x AFA, in some situations actually works better (from an AF standpoint) than an AF prime or zoom alone. You have to get used to the quriks -- it will only focus within a certain distance range. Rather than let that annoy me, I chose to learn how to make this work in my favor. . . at infinity on the lens, it will AF from infinity to let's say @ 20 m (I made that distance up, never walked it off). The closer the subject, the narrower the range of distances, and since it narrows the DOF, the lens has to be sharp and contrasty wide open to optimize the AF capabilities.

It takes a while to get used to this, so give it a good chance. If you can get pretty close to the actual focusing distance, it rarely hunts from stop to stop, and you can actually hear the difference between too far or too close (I could be imagining this though, and my focus ring adjustments might just be unconsciously dependent on what I'm seeing in the VF). Any stop to stop hunt is much faster than a similar hunt with any AF lens since the rotation is so relatively slight, so you have to keep your fingers on the focusing ring and make adjustments, if needed, on the fly.

If you're shooting a lot of subjects within a relatively small range of distances, the focusing is usually very fast and sure, If you're shooting over a large range of distances, it's fiddly, but you can get used to it, or by presetting the FL to close to the guesstimated range of the subject. I'm not fast enough to make the changes necessary for BIF at relatively close distances, but I have had reasonable success with larger birds at maybe 10-20m and farther.

Because of the longer focusing throw of the A*200, it's harder to use with the 1.7x as you have to turn the ring farther, but again, it's a matter of getting used to it. Experience is the key, IMO.

Bottom line, keep your eyes open for a similar deal on the FA*300, or see what the DA*300 might bring. There's a huge difference between being able to shoot at @300mm and at @ 500. But if you're satisfied with the reach at 340mm (it is 510mm with the crop factor after all), then you're all set.

. . . and then there's the Tamron SP300/2.8 LD -- but that's a whole different thing at over twice the weight. . . and the A*300/2.8 is even heavier. I told myself for years that I'd never go that route, too heavy and too expensive -- but I did in a fit of weakness, and don't regret it a bit. Having the 1.7x AFA was the deciding factor. An AF 510mm/4.5 and 714mm/f6.7 was too good to pass for me, even at over 2.5kg. . .Of course, YMMV


Anyway, have fun with the new stuff -- This multi-lens acquisition should satisfy your LBA for a while. . .look forward to seeing some results soon.

Scott




snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2007, 11:49 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

Kjell,

I would test the 50mm 1.7 against the 1.4 before you get rid of it since it seems to be a bit sharper wide open compared to my 50mm 1.4.

I have a A 28mm 2.8 and I find it a bit soft for my taste but I have never used the FA 28mm 2.8, so I don't know about that. My FA* 28-80mm 2.8 is sharper at 28mm than the A is.

The A* 200 focuses faster than the FA* 300 since the faster the lens the better the AF1.7 works. It really works fast on my A* 85mm 1.4, which is what I use it with the most.

My AF1.7 seems to work better with MF lenses than it does with AF lenses set on manual focus for some reason. I agree with Scott about the longer focus throw of the lenses, the longer it is the more you have to mess with the AF1.7 to cover the full range of focus.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2007, 2:41 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

Thanks Scott and Tom for sharing your experience, I'll give a reportback when I have made my mistakes and progress.

A FA* 300 isn't very cheap, what would you say about a A* 300 instead (doesn't come for free either)? With the 200+TC it' seems like I have the 300 mm range covered, what you say Scott is that I'd need a 300 to get a handholdable 540... hmmm. I have a 600 mm, far from handholdable. I'll see if the TC works with that one. The manual focus TC I have used with it so far doesn't give focus confirmation in the VF. But then we are talking f11...

And the 28 mm... I have the 16-45, so for good light I've got that FL covered well enough. What need is a fast one for indoors in smaller rooms, when shooting concerts of chamber orchestra type (31, 31, 31... ouch it hurts my wallet). So if the FA 28 is too soft at larger apertures it'll be of pretty little use for my needs. Anyone have any hands on experience with the FA 35 2.0?

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2007, 7:51 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

The FA*300 is a great lens, just great, but not cheap, although it looks like the DA* 300 is going to be about the same price or even more when it comes out.

The A* 300 is also a great lens, but the one I had wasn't quite (very slight difference) as sharp as the FA*300 is, which is why I sold it.

Test the FA 28 before you give up on it, since I have never used that version.

The limited's are very nice, but not in my budget right now and even used ones seem to hold their value.

You did very good, now enjoy!

Tom

ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 PM.