[k100d]

I don't have this problem with my D200, and this week I bought a D700. I was going to run two systems (Nikon and Pentax) because of all these Pentax lenses I have.

(sigh)

I'll either return the camera, if possible, or sell it, sell all the other Pentax stuff, and just buy two or three more lenses for the Nikon and move ahead.

What a surprise.

Anyone want a 400 f/2.8, 300 f/4.5, or 200 Macro?

sounded like you knew what you were talking about but i thought i'd make the suggestion anyways. that's really too bad

if you put those lenses up on the forum, i think the 300 4.5 and Macro will go pretty quick. the 400 2.8 is probably a bit too much for most people

[Tom2]

Sorry to hear about your eye relief issue. As a fellow "4 eyes" I live thru this with binoculars, telescopes, cameras etc too. Glasses that hug your face a bit will help--just tight enough that your eyelashes don't brush the lenses.

Yours isn't the 400/2.8 with a small chip near the outside edge of the front element is it?

Ron, we glasses wearers get used to this. I'm kind of an optics nut, owning more than a dozen pairs of binoculars, lots of spotting scopes, three dozen cameras, etc.

I just found the K20d to be worse than my other cameras -- digital, film and FF.

I don't think there is a chip in the front element of my 400. Now I have to look! Have you been in my photo room checking out the gear? <grin> It's never been listed anywhere.

Tom Gresham

[Blue]

I also astigmatism problems and I currently use Pentax DSLR gear and Nikon gear.
I actually have more trouble MF these dslr including Nikon due to the focusing screen designs. I can fill your pain. I have messed up some excellent opportunities thinking I had a good shot to only find out it was slightly out of focus. That includes with Nikon.

[Tom2]

Pictures of the 400.

Attached Images

   

[Ron Boggs]

Haven't peeked into your photo room. Your situation just seemed to fit my experiences from about 10 or 12 years ago. A fellow had a 400/2.8 that he never used, just sat in a closet. He almost sold it to me, then rescinded his offer though he felt he still wouldn't use it. That lens had a small chip. I just thought it strange that he had this killer lens he wasn't using and you have this killer lens you're not using...so I put 2 and 2 together and got 68. Wrong again!

[Canada_Rockies]

I'm sure there is a thread here on it, but using SEARCH didn't turn it up for me.

I'm trying to figure out the advantages (if any) of using the lenses from the 645 or 67 system on the K20d.

A pointer to that info would be appreciated.

Hi, Tom. The only advantage is when you already have the medium format lenses. They are much heavier and larger for the same focal length because they have to cover that huge image circle.

[Tom2]

Hi, Tom. The only advantage is when you already have the medium format lenses. They are much heavier and larger for the same focal length because they have to cover that huge image circle.

Okay, that makes sense.

If you have the focal lengths covered with lenses designed for the "35mm" format camera, there's really no reason to force MF lenses into use.

Thanks.

[kenyee]

Interesting...I also wear glasses and have high astigmatism. How much do you think you're missing from the viewfinder? I figured it'd only show 95% anyways, so never noticed much.
Now if a 100% viewfinder didn't show me the entire screen, I'd be bummed out...

[Tom2]

Interesting...I also wear glasses and have high astigmatism. How much do you think you're missing from the viewfinder? I figured it'd only show 95% anyways, so never noticed much.
Now if a 100% viewfinder didn't show me the entire screen, I'd be bummed out...

I figure I see about 70% of the viewfinder. I have to move the camera around, or my eye around, to see different parts of the image. I can't see the data at the bottom of the screen if I have positioned my eye to see the top of the image.

Way, way too slow to shoot that way, not to mention really uncomfortable.

The D200 doesn't do that, and the D700 is just delightful in the size of the viewfinder.

I just don't see any need to compromise when there are good alternatives.

[tranq78]

My hat's off to all you A*400 owners. You must all be very muscular and fit.

I don't own one but I did hold one a while ago. After only a few seconds my forearms started to ache from the weight.

The fellow who handed it to me grunted as he hefted it off the floor to give it to me. I was a bit worried he'd hurt himself since he was using his back and not his legs, and he was an elderly gentleman.

I must admit I'd like to own this lens. My 2 gimbal mounts loves making friends with new lenses, and they frequently complains that I don't take it out for enough exercise.

[m8o]

How many do you want?

400mm f/2.8 SMCP-A ED (IF) Telephoto Lens

At that price I guess I'll stick w/what I have...

Something fishy about this one:
http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/pho/884132429.html

LOL! At that price I imagine the seller is just looking to get enough money from his latest cat-burgler haul for his next fix! that's fishy even if he forgot a "0" in the listing.

[m8o]

I don't have this problem with my D200, and this week I bought a D700. I was going to run two systems (Nikon and Pentax) because of all these Pentax lenses I have.
(sigh)
I'll either return the camera, if possible, or sell it, sell all the other Pentax stuff, and just buy two or three more lenses for the Nikon and move ahead.
What a surprise.
Anyone want a 400 f/2.8, 300 f/4.5, or 200 Macro?

I need to take my glasses off to use my Pentax else I bend the nose piece & smudge up the glasses badly. But that's just me. You've been doing this for -far- longer than me!

Please PM me your price for the 400/2.8. Times are tough and I don't exactly have the $$$ to spare, and can't exactly sell stock [!], but I've been looking for a dedicated lens to put my 2nd 1.7X AF TC onto and I've been desiring this lens since I recently learned about it. If the price is right...

[K10DJIM]

How much do you want for your glass?