On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 21:47:05 +0200, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wasn't the 40mm focal length a little odd on 35mm as well? I always thought it was the focal length that allows design of the smallest possible lens, given the mount specifications. If I'm not completely off-base with that, it would not have changed between M and DA... Can anyone confirm or deny? -- Regards, Lucas > Isnt the focal length a little odd for pentax digital (60mm equiv.)? > They need a 26mm pancake to emulate the old 40mm on film. No? > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > P. J. Alling > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:38 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Well, that's it, I cracked. > > It's smaller, really a pancake, since it has no aperture ring. It's a > DA lens that covers full frame, but it's not guarantied to cover full > frame. If you use it on film and don't like the results you have no > right to complain. > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >> I wasn't aware that they had added a new pancake and already >> Stated that. Is it as small as the original pancake? I still >> Am not clear as to whether the new one is APS or FF? >> jco >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >> gfen >> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 2:18 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: RE: Well, that's it, I cracked. >> >> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> >> >>> Sorry for my error, isnt this a APS only format lens? >>> >>> >> >> He zigs, he zags! >> >> Wasn't that the topic of discussion here? Refusal to buy a Pentax DSLR >> because you can't use your K mount lenses the way that God intended > them >> >> to be? That Pentax "professional" DSLRs should include this option (and > >> for the record, I'm not disagreeing with you, no sir, I agree > completely >> >> on this, but even I relented and am attempting to move on)? >> >> And then, to back it up, you offered us the inability to use the >> M40/2.8, >> only to be stymied when you realized there wasn't just an updated >> 40/2.8, >> but additional pancake lenses in the line? >> >> Maybe your argument gets easier to follow upon subsequent readings, but >> on >> our maiden voyage here, I'm not sure I can figure out the destination >> we're piloting to. >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Groetjes, Lucas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
