The GX10/K10D really is sealed! (longish)

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
t...
Väinö Louekari wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

Any thoughts on the value of the 40mm/2.8 pancake versus the 50mm/1.4? A
friend asked & I recommended the 50 unless he's desperate for
compactness and requires something close to a normal focal length. It
seems the 50 offers more variety departing from the kit lens. The only
real strong point of the 40 I can see is the non-polygonal stopped down
OOF rendering. I figure the kit lens is at about f/4 at 40mm (vs 2.8)
but really that's not as compellingly different than the 50 at 1.4 which
would really be more exciting and worth bothering with.


Optically any 50/1,4 (Pentax has had many versions of this lens)is better
than 40/2,8. Angle of view is of course different, but if that is not the
determining factor 50/1,4 is the one to prefer. If Your frend really
needs a lens around 40 mm he/she should have a 43 mm 1,9 Limited.

I didn't know the 43 pancake was f/1.9

The DA40 is F2.8, the FA43 is F1.9, two different lenses. FA is full frame,
DA is 1.5 crop.

Pete D wrote:

And it's AF, and reduced to 40mm from 43mm for 60 eq. on APS... pretty
cool. My 45P Nikkor is MF. Is there a small Pentax DSLR or is it sort of
D70 sized?

There is I think at last count 5 small Pentax D-SLRs that have been
produced, DS, DL, DS2, DL2, K100D. You can pick up the earlier versions for
a few hundred dollars and they have pretty much every feature you could ever
need including spot metering and MLU, etc. Good enough for 12x18 prints and
bigger depending on the subject and will meter with any lens you can
actually attach.

Just a point of accuracy here... A-series and later lenses will have no
problem. For lenses previous to that, there are some caveats for
metering, but in practice it's not that big a deal.

--
http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2..._argument.html

Paul Mitchum wrote:


Just a point of accuracy here... A-series and later lenses will have no
problem. For lenses previous to that, there are some caveats for
metering, but in practice it's not that big a deal.
Pete D wrote:



Any big caveats, say compared to using a K lens on an MZ-5n?

Pete

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

"jean" a écrit dans le message de
...

"Doug Jewell" a écrit dans le message de
...


"Paul Furman" wrote in message
...
Any thoughts on the value of the 40mm/2.8 pancake versus the 50mm/1.4?
A
friend asked & I recommended the 50 unless he's desperate for
compactness
and requires something close to a normal focal length. It seems the 50
offers more variety departing from the kit lens. The only real strong
point of the 40 I can see is the non-polygonal stopped down OOF
rendering.
I figure the kit lens is at about f/4 at 40mm (vs 2.8) but really
that's
not as compellingly different than the 50 at 1.4 which would really be
more exciting and worth bothering with.

Haven't used either, but from what I've heard both are very sharp. So
personally I'd be inclined to go for the extra 2 stops of the 50/1.4.

I wish Canon had a lens like that Pentax pancake lens, put that on a
Drebel
and you get a nice high performance small (ish) camera. For size only, it
makes perfect sense.

the Pentax 50 1.4 get sharp only @ f2.8, exactly like the Canon 50mm 1.8,
but the Canon is half the price.

"Pete D" a écrit dans le message de
...



And it's AF, and reduced to 40mm from 43mm for 60 eq. on APS... pretty
cool. My 45P Nikkor is MF. Is there a small Pentax DSLR or is it sort of
D70 sized?

There is I think at last count 5 small Pentax D-SLRs that have been
produced, DS, DL, DS2, DL2, K100D. You can pick up the earlier versions
for
a few hundred dollars and they have pretty much every feature you could
ever
need including spot metering and MLU, etc. Good enough for 12x18 prints
and
bigger depending on the subject and will meter with any lens you can
actually attach.

also including 4AA batteries, slowest auto focus on the market, crappy built
in flash/AF assist and terrible jpg engine !

Pentax is dead