Well I've heard that. However it's relatively huge. The 10-17 is petite by comparison. Most of my lenses fit into the smallest packages possible and its a tradition I wish to continue.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The DA 12-24 is better than good. I used it for my "Welcome" shoot this > weekend. I wanted to use a prime, but I needed a bit more than 24mm. But at > 22mm, the DA 12-24 was outstanding. The client was very pleased and commented > on the sharpness of the images. > Paul > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> I got to handle one of those on a K10D not long ago. It's most likely >> the only DA lens I'm seriously thinking of getting. >> >> David Savage wrote: >> >>> On 9/30/07, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I am yet very much undecided. >>>> >>>> >>> DA 10-17mm f3.5-4.5 FE @ 10mm, shooting distance about 6 inches from >>> Lucy's nose: >>> >>> <http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/Images/K10D/_IGP7094.jpg> >>> (damn this is a fun little lens) >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> This isn't a serious recommendation. I know & I fully understand your >>> full frame lens preference. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Remember, it’s pillage then burn. >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow >> the directions. >> > > > -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
