The F 4-5.6/35-80mm is not crap. I've had better lenses, but this litle Pentax zoom is very well made. And it does a good job for the money. Since my 2.6-2.8 AT-X Tokina 28-70mm was given in for repair, I have found myself using this F Pentax for almost everything (on the *ist D).
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Margus Mannik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. marts 2005 21:35 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: How good or bad? Hi, well, my remark was addressed to cheap 3rd party lenses vs. Pentax ones. I don't count all of 3rd party products bad (having couple of Sigmas myself and pretty happy with 'em), but my experience shows that Pentax lenses have been generally better. Coatings, build quality, feel...or am I wrong? BTW, that zoom should be optically the same as F and FA 35-80 f4-5.6 versions. I think, that lens shouldn't be total crap if they didn't changed optical build for later series. BR, Margus Fred wrote: >>it's quite compact / light and SMC Pentax lens after all, not some Sigma >>or Tokina, right? >> >> > >I'm not familiar with that particular Pentax zoom, Margus, but your "not >some Sigma or Tokina" comment got my attention - there ~are~ some good >Tokina zooms, you know - <g> - (in the "normal range" zoom, the ATX 35-70/2.8 >comes to mind, for example). > >If the A 35-80/4-5.6 doesn't work out for you, you might keep your eyes >open for an A 35-70/4, which is also a neat (and compact) "normal range" >zoom, too, with a very good macro function. > >Fred > > > > > >
