I think that if you changed the mount on most of Pentax's longer lenses you would get acceptable coverage on 6x7 format. That coverage just wouldn't be guaranteed if you managed to somehow get a K or M42 lens mounted on a 6x7 while the other way around would be just fine.
Boris Liberman wrote: > Yes, Peter, that's my understanding too. > > But why then honorable sir William would take the DA 70 and probably > DA 40 lenses and mount them on his film camera? > > Like I said - a little blurred... > > Boris > > On 10/2/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> F FA FAJ Full frame 35mm >> D FA Full frame (24x36mm) Digital (what ever that means special coatings >> at the very least) with a f stop ring for film bodies. >> DA Reduced frame digital >> >> The definitions are fairly simple. Full frame will be guaranteed to >> cover 24x36mm Reduced frame will be guaranteed to cover 16x24mm. It's >> not that complicated. >> >> Boris Liberman wrote: >> >>> If you remember, Godfrey, FAJ 18-35 used to be a kit lens for *istD when >>> it first came out. >>> >>> No, there is nothing confusing about it. It is just that the definition >>> of what exactly is FA, FAJ, DA, D FA lens is a little blurred to me. >>> >>> Boris >>> >>> Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I don't know what's confusing about it. The FA-J lenses were a small >>>> set of modestly priced "junior" lenses in the FA series produced for >>>> the Film cameras. >>>> >>>> The DA series are the latest lenses designed for the Digital cameras. >>>> >>>> Just because a lens is optimized for a digital sensor doesn't mean >>>> that its image circle *has* to be too small to cover a larger format. >>>> >>>> G >>>> >>>> On Oct 1, 2007, at 9:37 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Well, yes, I hear what Mark, Godfrey and you are saying. But consider >>>>> the FAJ lenses. Although very short living (are they still produced?) >>>>> and with just 3 lenses - they were still full frame (proper) lenses >>>>> that >>>>> did't have an aperture ring... >>>>> >>>>> Indeed, this is confusing. >>>>> >>>>> In fact, if anyone of us who has these DA lenses (40, 70) would >>>>> care for >>>>> a (as much as I dislike this term) full frame test, it would be most >>>>> helpful. >>>>> >>>>> OTOH, it is known that DA 21 does *not* cover the full frame. >>>>> >>>>> Go figure... >>>>> >>>>> Boris >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> -- >> 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.
