Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-10-2020, 02:07 PM   #1
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 35
Findings of Frederiks Pentax Bureau of Investigation

Jepp, my bureau is full of Pentax glass!

I have now finally, after 40+ years as a Pentaxian, sorted them out, wich ones to use, and there are no more, and no less, than twoo of them!

Long story short:

My first camera for own money was a Pentax MX with a Pentax M50/1.7 lens.
At that time, I didn't realize what a gem this tiny lens is, nor did I realize what a gem the Pentax MX really is. I did'nt apreciate them properly.
But, now, the last years, I see them in new light: They have real dials, real buttons and real focus and apperture rings. All operation on them is instantaneous and precise: you feel what you are doing with tactile feedback, a sensation for your senses! The build quality, the materials, and how they interact together is pure joy!

That said, I have investigated a number of M-lenses trying to find out the really true gems for my photography style: models, landscape, nature in general. For models often wide open lenses. For birds and animals razor sharp optics at open appertures.

As I have not yet found a digital full frame camera in my likings (and I have scanned the whole market during one decade+ by now), I use an APS-C one, and not a Pentax camera(!), because I am as picky with the camera, as with the lenses. As you will se, I am picky in a special way :-)

I really like lightweight gear, and gear with real buttons and rings, solidly built, joufull to use with solid and precise tactile feedback. Robust, strong and lightweight. Nothing on it that hasn't a real function. And no functions that doesn't add to simplicity and usability.

I guess you all figured out that I really like the Pentax M-series lenses. All other camera brands have the same type of lenses from that era, but all comes nicely together in the Pentax M-serie. All other brands have some sort of shortcomings like lenses mounting in the wrong direction, strange bayonets, focus throw in wrong direction etc, etc. Not to mention their cameras. Just strange and wierd to me :-)

With that said, I sadly can't find a Pentax camera any more... I really wish I could!

To sum all this up a bit:
-I'm a real sucker for wide open apperture photography
-A real sucker for super sharp lenses when it comes to birds and anilmals
-I'm a total sucker for lightweight equipment
-And I really appreciate thrustfull and precise tactile mechanical feedback for joy to my senses!

On this basis, the Pentax lenses I have investigated:

M28/2.8
M50/2
M501.7
M50/1.4
M85/2
M100/2.8
M120/2.8
M135/3.5
M75-150/4
Takumar 135/2.5

For birds and wildlife I have not found any Pentax lens really competitive with the Samyang/Rokinon 135/2: It's super sharp on any apperture, takes on stacked teleconverters and images still turns out super sharp. I really don't need longer focal lenght, I just stack converters to convinience. Focus throw in right direction, apperture ring, solid mechanics and build quality. Lightweight for what it is: a solid performer to any desiered focal lenght and with a to that really reasonable corresponding apperture to my lightweight preference.

The same for wide angle, no Pentax lens matching the Venus Optics Laowa 9/2.8, as I need really wide angle and optics capable of dealing with heavenly stars. It's lightweight, solid mechanics, a joy to use (but not fully Pentax M-series joy). It's really a good compromise in lack of a real Pentax M-style lens :-)

One could point me to newer Pentax lenses with autofocus, but since I'm not using a Pentax camera I'm depending on lens designs made for manual focus with a long and smooth focus throw (really to be able to focus manually with accuracy).

But! Now back to topic and the Pentax lenses I have found working! Outstanding glass, outstanding functionality, outstanding design, outstanding features and outstanding joy to use!

Drumbeat...

Pentax M50/1.7 and Takumar 135/2.5!!

Lenses really sharp, really lightweight, really versatile, really nice mecanics, really good and fun to use :-)

Not much to say about the 50/1.7, everyone likes it. In my findings, by different criterias, I prefere it ower the 50/1.4

The Takumar 135/2.5 may seem like an oddball in this tested company, without proper SMC-coating, belonging to a budget lens series. But it is a truly stellar performer: Sharp at 2.8, and from then on low aberrations (as sharp, or eaven sharper than the praised M100/2,8), takes on a 2x converter nicely from f/4 or even earlier, nice bokhe, large full open apperture. The lack of true M-series mechanical feeling it compensates by funny coloured scales and figures :-) And, it has a built in slide out hood, not to forget this really nice feature!

This two Pentax lenses, the Rokinon/Samyang 135/2 and Laowa 9/2.8 is all i need. I combine them using a 2x MC7 teleconverter (if necessary I just stack another 2X, or another(!) on the Rokinon...) and a lens turbo 0.7x.

This mounted on a wery tiny Sony NEX 5N 16 MP APS-C camera, WITH the tilltable electronic viewfinder Sony FDA-EV1S.

Yes, no Pentax camera has a tilltable electronic viewfinder, a must ever since I started using one. Any camera without that is a 100% dealbraker for me for now on, regardles other beenefits. And also this tiny little lightweigt NEX performs wery, wery well with it's really nice sensor (though really fiddly small buttons, totally hopeless to use).

Listen Pentax/Ricoh: you will beat this in a blink if you decide: small, tactile mirrorless camera with tilltable viewfinder and no crippled K-mount (if you don't start making real M-series style lenses/autofocus lenses again. But then you need a non crippled mount... Ha, ha). -Not much buttons and menus: ISO, shutterspeed and exposure compensation buttons on top of camera (combined with front and back wheel for the same). No top display taking up space for what purpose from what you already feel and se from the mechanical buttons, wheels and rings giving joyfull tactile feedback. Menus stripped down to a minimum, the NEX 5N is exemplary, but strip it down eaven more to just some few really photographic meaningfull settings. And choose this settings picky, and they don't need to be many. The less picky they are picked, the more of them they tend to be and most of them totally uneccesary.

This above lenses gives me (with the converters):
9 mm wide angle, croppable to around 25 mm
35/1.2 (50/1.7+0.7x lens turbo), fully usable from 1.7 (sharp in center at 1.2)
50/1.7, usable from 1.7, sharp from 2
90/1.7 (135/2.5+0.7x lens turbo), usable from 2, sharp and without aberrations from 2.8 (aberrations correctable in post at any apperture)
100/3.5 (50/1.7+2x converter), fully usable from 4, sharp from 5.6
135/2.5, sharp, but totally full of glow and aberrations at 2,5. Eaven sharper at 2.8 and no aberrations and glow. Super sharp at 4
270/5,2 (M135/2.5+2x converter), totally full of aberrations at 2.5. Sharp but aberrations at 2.8 (correctible in post). Eaven sharper from 4 and onwards, no aberrations.

But, for real tele I use the Rokinon/Samyang: from 2.8 super sharp, no aberrations and takes on any number of converters, MC7 ones.
MC4 or it's sibling MC6 is another bread of converters, even the 1.4x ones (have not found an 1.4 converter MC7). I don't use more than one of the 1.4x ones (not stackable), but really, 1.4x is not much of a difference. 2X is.

And the Rokinon/Samyang 135/2 gives 90/1.4 with the 0.7x lens turbo (though a really heawy combination). A nice portrait/model lens. Nice bokeh, really sharp. Also the M50/1.7 is wery nice for models, and lightweight :-)

Believe me, I have tried all of above listed lenses out. The praised M85/2 can give terrible aberrations at 2, not correctable in post. Therefore really not usefull for my purposes. The 120/2.8 has wierd aberrations at 2.8. The 100/2.8 has no built in slide out hood and gives aberrations at 2.8, and the 50/1.7+2x converter gives 100/3.5 close as good. Also the 100 is to short to really give reach and the 135/2.5 is tack sharp at 2.8 (wich the 100 is just a tack low of and also gives aberrations (I have tested two different spiecements M100/2.8). The M135/3.5 isn't sharp at 3.5, wich makes it to inferior to the 135/2.5, eaven though lighter.

The M75-150/4 is a really nice lens. Sharp, versatile and low aberrations. On the slow side. Does'nt add much considerad the above two lenses I picked as favorites.

Yes my friends, this is the twoo Pentax lenses I have found to use :-)

And they are sheapos, real bargains!

But you need a NEX 5N to shoot them, as you really can't focus them properly with live view on Pentax cameras: the screen is hopeless to se in daylight because of reflexions, and if you need reading glasses like me, you have to fiddle arond with them: a total dealbreaker compared with not having to with a viewfinder with dioptri adjustment. And: try out a tilltable viewfinder, incredible convinient in many, many situations! Thats why the NEX 5N with viewfinder.

And abowe all Pentax/Ricoh: Please make again vievfinders the same size as the Pentax MX! Then one can again properly focus manually, combine with a digital split image and at a button press viewfinder magnification. One press magnification on, one press of. Nothing more, no extra presses to reside back to non magnification. One press on, one more press same button off :-) You see, less is more :-) This you will easily make if you like, and, it's really easier to make than a camera propped with nonsens functions not adding.

Ok! For me, long time Pentaxian, all there is are two vintage lenses from Pentax at the moment.

Easily changed if liked and desiered, I'm just waiting for something usefull to pop up in Pentax land.

03-10-2020, 10:48 PM   #2
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by Nokturner Quote
Please make again vievfinders the same size as the Pentax MX! Then one can again properly focus manually, combine with a digital split image and at a button press viewfinder magnification.
Hmmmm...it sounds like you might prefer something from Fujifilm. Am I mistaken that this post is not really about Pentax lenses?


Steve
03-10-2020, 11:06 PM   #3
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,254
This is about waaaaayyyyyyy more than Pentax lenses, so it has been moved to "General Photography"
03-11-2020, 12:14 AM   #4
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 35
Original Poster
Fujifilm is close, when, or if, there is a model with a tiltable viewfinder, I will look closely on that train.

Maybe, maybe Pentax/Ricoh will do something in the meantime (one can always wish).

Really, I wanted to share my findings on the lenses from these kind of preferences, to share what kind of stuff that gives me joy to use when photographing.

Imagine, Pentax M-style lenses, designed for fully fledged manual focus, and paired with autofocus, mounted on a camera body with tiltable LARGE electronic viewfinder (take a look in a vintage Pentax MX for reference, 1x magnification), utilizing both worlds possibilitys to the best. Camera house max 600 gram, battery included, FF-sensor. Maybe even image stabilization... Dreaming on here :-)

By some reason I hope for this from Pentax, in the past they have gracefully made this kind of gear (with the technology of that time).

As to now, Pentax M-series lenses are just wounderfull pieces of glass and craftmanship to use. Still nothing like it out there. Imagine modern ones on a modern MX-style house...

Yes Fujifilm is making kind of this, but it's not Pentax, as Nikon, Canon, Chinon etc was not Pentax in the days of the M-series lenses :-)

Yes, maybe this is not about Pentax lenses. It might be about findings liking to use Pentax gear :-)

---------- Post added 03-11-20 at 08:16 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
This is about waaaaayyyyyyy more than Pentax lenses, so it has been moved to "General Photography"
Perfect and thank's! Right place

03-11-2020, 12:25 AM - 1 Like   #5
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,254
I honestly think you would do just fine with a KP and your M series primes. But if you are determined to be unhappy, you will be.
The K series 135/2.5 is the same as your Takumar and won't need an adaptor.
The K 85/1.8 is a better lens than the M 85/2.0, but I suspect you won't get one as cheap.

You can dream as hard as you like, but ultimately, reality bites.

Use the gear that makes you happy.
03-11-2020, 12:54 AM - 1 Like   #6
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Minneapolis
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,068
I am surprised that you enjoy an electronic viewfinder when you want the controls to be mechanical. Actual seeing seems to go with actual feeling the controls. Having your senses fully engaged except sight for a visual instrument seems ironic. Then again I am fine that Bob Dylan went electronic. Just curious about it.
03-11-2020, 02:36 AM - 1 Like   #7
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,735
QuoteOriginally posted by Nokturner Quote
But you need a NEX 5N to shoot them, as you really can't focus them properly with live view on Pentax cameras: the screen is hopeless to se in daylight because of reflexions, and if you need reading glasses like me, you have to fiddle arond with them: a total dealbreaker compared with not having to with a viewfinder with dioptri adjustment. And: try out a tilltable viewfinder, incredible convinient in many, many situations! Thats why the NEX 5N with viewfinder.
But liveview and a lcd viewfinder loupe is the ultimate for focusing. With the added features of focus peaking and liveview zoom. And in seconds being able to remove it and utilise optical viewfinder when focusing not so critical. And the K-1 is perfect at it and presents the lenses in a far better way than apsc.

03-11-2020, 02:47 AM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2018
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 575
Most manual focus lenses from prime manufacturers during the M series era have similar handling characteristics and performance. If you want similar small size then look at Olympus. If you want to pretend you are delving into Sony's heritage through Zeiss lenses look at the manual focus Contax lenses.
Which aberrations are you talking about? Spherical, longditudinal chromatic or latitudinal chromatic, coma, distortion, field curvature and many more are common in lenses. It is unrealistic to expect aberration free lenses from that era or even now. Adding turbo boosters and teleconverters only adds to the problem.
03-11-2020, 05:26 AM   #9
Unregistered User
Guest




I be down wit'dat. I mourn the loss of good quality analog stuff that was made to work well and last a long time. I note that people have finally figured out that the sound quality from an analog record is better than you can get from any amount of digital sampling. I spent the day, yesterday, recovering from plumbing problems arising from poorly constructed parts made in China. I saw this day coming when, in 1983, my then four year old son threw a tennis ball at my new car (a "Renault Alliance") and put a dent in the fender. By contrast, I had a 1962 Chevrolet Impala, which survived having had a large diameter white oak fall on it during a storm. I want a real telephone, not this jury-rigged "smartphone" that appears to have been programmed by seventh-graders. Is it any wonder that aircraft are falling out of the sky due to quality control problems? Mao Tse Tung said, "[The capitalist West] will sell us the rope we need to hang them." Turns out he was a brilliant judge of character.
03-11-2020, 06:47 AM   #10
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 35
Original Poster
Many wise suggestions and questions. I try to comment and answer:

A KP is of course a nice camera, but no tiltable viewfinder, and I'm not so keen on going back to reading glasses looking on focus peaking and magnifyed LW zoom on a screen again. One could of course use a viewfinder loupe, and I have tried that out, but find that an electronic viewfinder with focus peaking and magnification/live view zoom is far more superior and convinient to me.

Yes, an FF-sensor would really be great! I have tried, but still find that the compromise the tiny NEX gives in APS-C gives me more. I have to sacrifice to much that no FF-camera still has got, especially about the tiltable vievfinder.

Ok, my Takumar is the Non-SMC Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet.

The viewfinder doesn't need to be electronic, but I like focus peaking, magnification/magnifyed LW, play back of images and everything else you do on traditional DSLR:s on the back screen of them to come up in the viewfinder. In the electronic viewfinder, you se ewerything like if you where using a magnifying loupe on the back LCD on a traditional DSLR (as suggested to do).

Olympus made, and makes, absolute stellar small lenses! A silly thing is that I like the apperture ring to be in the back end of the lens. This because I already have nice lenses built that way. I'm getting confused, likes them to be in one and same place so I find them, my limitation :-)

I named aberrations, because as you say there are plenty of different ones.

Of the vintage Pentax lenses I listed, I picked out the two that by my expectations and criterias for a lens set up (a small number of selected and light weight primes) nicely works with both a speed booster and 2x MC7 teleconverter, might be of interrest for someone to check out by himself if trying to find.
They are not aberration free, and the edges of the frames gets soft unless closing the aperture down, and maybe not even then. Also aberrations increase. Nothing else I expect of vintage glass. And guess what? I find them really good, fully usable :-)

One interresting thing, on APS-C, the M85/2 actually benefits from the speed booster I use when mounted. Aberrations at f/2 decreases to in post correctible levels. Anyway, without the speed booster and if unlucky light conditions and unlucky colour combinations in the motive, I can't figure out how to correct the aberrations in a sensible way in post, without having to reside to do it all manually, a wery tedious work I more than gladly avoid not using the lens.
At f/2, the M85/2 in my experience, mostly suffers from that purple colour cast along harsh transitions, purple fringing.

Really, I'm not in to specifically naming all the different aberrations the lenses I listed are showing up when shoot wide open or near wide open, without, and with the converters and boosters. Hope you understand :-)

Generally, on all listed lenses, most dissapears to wery acceptable levels when stopping down to f/4 (f/4 on the apperture ring).
03-11-2020, 07:12 AM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Larrymc's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Mississippi, USA
Posts: 5,245
QuoteOriginally posted by Nokturner Quote
A KP is of course a nice camera, but no tiltable viewfinder, and I'm not so keen on going back to reading glasses looking on focus peaking and magnifyed LW zoom on a screen again. One could of course use a viewfinder loupe, and I have tried that out, but find that an electronic viewfinder with focus peaking and magnification/live view zoom is far more superior and convinient to me.
I think you are mistaken about the KP not having a tiltable viewfinder. It does in fact have an articulated viewfinder back screen.

Last edited by Larrymc; 03-11-2020 at 08:27 AM.
03-11-2020, 07:32 AM   #12
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
I simply have no clue what you're talking about.

I use live view and the tilt screen all the time. I need my reading glasses to adjust the camera on the back screen, but the diopter on every Pentax camera will allow you to do so looking through the viewfinder if you wish. I also make extensive use of hyperfocl distances.

When I use manual focus lenses the focus confirm in the viewfinder tells me exactly where my DoF is centred.

I get the feeling if I could shoot beside you for 20 minutes we could get this straightened out.

I have a right angle viewfinder attachment for my Pentax viewfinder (readily available) , since the tilt-able back screen was introduced K-3ii, K-P , K-1, K1ii I haven't used it.

You can always find ways you can't do things.

Who is telling you this stuff, like the K-P doesn't have a tilting screen? Are you getting your info from a camera store, from a guy who doesn't sell Pentax? You seem to know almost nothing about the use of Pentax cameras.

IN fact, you yourself don't mention what Pentax's you've used.

Your point seems to be Pentax doesn't make a tiltable viewfinder and you have to have it.

I have no quarrel with the 'Pentax doesn't make a tiltable viewfinder" but your "I have to have one" is a strictly arbitrary from my perspective totally irrational decision.

Maybe come back when you have a Pentax body and we'll tell you how to do what you want to do. Again from my perspective, the tiltable viewfinder is an unnecessary gimmick that I don't even desire to use. For low angle the tilting back screen works fine and I have no intention of kneeling in the mud pressing my face to a viewfinder.

But if you're going to throw an "I have to have it" tantrum, go buy a Fuji or whatever. You probably shouldn't be telling Pentax users they need one, because we all for the most part get along fine without it, and in my case, I don't even want it. And I'm definitely not paying for an extra part, just so I have one.

Fuji has it as an extra. I guess it's so unnecessary even Fuji didn't feel the need to include it in the original box.You sound like a store salesman trying to talk up stock you can't move, not a photographer trying to get better images.

And comparing 30-40 year old M lenses to modern optics by Rokinon etc. ... really? You do know about the advances of computerized design that happened in about 1990 don't you? Of course you're right, Pentax doesn't make high quality manual glass like third party manufacturers who can keep prices down by only offering MF designs in a lot of different mounts. Personally, I bought into Pentax because I could use my old manual focus lenses. It took me about a day to realize, given the convenience of AF, they weren't going to be used much. I've gotten rid of all of them.

It's weird, the reason I bought into Pentax digital, was over the day after I brought home a *ist D with a kit lens and a Sigma 70-300 macro. Actual use is a wonderful teacher. I loved my old glass, but, it's time had come. It's the kind of mistake I guess we all have to make once.

BUt again, i personally think this is a camera store ploy. "Look, you can use your Pentax lenses on this camera." Then next time you come it will be "look how much easier your life would be with these new expensive lenses made specifically for your camera." It certainly worked on me.

Last edited by normhead; 03-11-2020 at 08:28 AM.
03-11-2020, 07:42 AM   #13
Unoriginal Poster
Loyal Site Supporter
iheiramo's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Espoo
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,175
Interesting opening. I too have dwelled deep into M series and M50/1.7 is one of my favorites. Kind of agree about M85/2 wide open performance. You have to be careful with it. At this moment it fills my needs, but maybe someday I'm willing to put up the money to upgrade performance. Same goes for M120 wide open, but despite it I find it better than M100/2.8. Apparently I don't shoot that much wide open that it would be a deal braker for me.

Looking your list of lenses there are few M's worth mentioning missing: M35/2, M150/3.5 and M*300/4.

My taste on cameras is quite opposite to you, as I love shooting with K1ii and when handheld I shoot with OVF. Compared to Pentax APSC bodies the larger view finder is a joy to use. Currently consider making it even better for manual by replacing focusing screen: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/173-general-photography/402151-i-replace...een-k-1-a.html
If I had two FF bodies, I'd already done it.
03-11-2020, 08:35 AM   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Wichita, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,506
A Fuji with a speedboster so that I have an EVF with focus peaking instead of looking at the back screen seems more fun to use, to me, but you gotta do you. Ultimately a full frame camera with a similar EVF and a non-crippled k-mount would be my preference and I do not think we will ever see such a thing.
03-11-2020, 08:42 AM - 1 Like   #15
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
A Fuji with a speedboster so that I have an EVF with focus peaking instead of looking at the back screen seems more fun to use, to me, but you gotta do you. Ultimately a full frame camera with a similar EVF and a non-crippled k-mount would be my preference and I do not think we will ever see such a thing.
How is it better than an OVF with focus confirmation coupled with knowledge of Hyperlocal techniques?

I do this so quickly I simply don't get why it has to be so complicated. I look focus and shoot. What's the issue?

The second issue here is, I often shoot multiple images at different ƒ-stops and focus points. What I pick out in the viewfinder is often not my favourite image in post production. I've yet to experience a viewfinder that will let me adequately examine an image not seen on a monitor. What's in focus is often not as important as how what's out of focus looks. I'd be wary of anything short of a 4x5 or 8x10 view camera in terms of short circuiting that process.

It always makes me uncomfortable with people trying to short circuit parts of a procedure that I've found to be critical.

Last edited by normhead; 03-11-2020 at 08:52 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
2x, aberrations, apperture, buttons, camera, focus, fujifilm, gear, k-mount, lens, lenses, look, m-series, pentax, pentax lens, photography, share, slr lens, tiltable, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Studio light and Accessory comparison findings Wired Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 3 10-27-2015 09:48 AM
An investigation of reported colour change when Ev boosting dosdan Post-Processing Articles 2 08-21-2013 02:11 AM
K5: What's the latest findings in Mixed lighting Front Focusing issue? Katsura Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 48 11-05-2012 05:40 AM
Shutter Count - My findings on a used K100D Super ajuett Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 03-05-2009 01:43 PM
Some Kenko 1.5x findings... FHPhotographer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 09-16-2008 03:35 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top