Jim, Yeah, I think we are gonna need to broaden the Brotherhood a bit. Include 645 and need to decide if this is a general brotherhood or a Pentax brotherhood.
Brother Bruce Monday, February 18, 2002, 10:13:20 AM, you wrote: JA> I don't own a 67. Alas, only a couple of 645 Pentaxes. If there is a JA> Brotherhood of the 67, I wonder how many sit at the 645 Pentax table? JA> Jim A. >> From: Chris Brogden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 11:12:21 -0600 (CST) >> To: Chris Brogden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: 67 Brotherhood >> >> On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> >>> Brother Chris, >>> >>> I think that you have to get a 67 body - a lens by itself won't cut >>> it. You have to feel and experience that weight (power!) to become >>> part of the brotherhood. >> >> Alas, Brother Bruce, you misunderstand. I *have* a 67, as well as the >> 150/2.8, 90/2.8LS, metered finder, waist-level finder, and grip. The lens >> owing to each of us is no more than your just dues to gain entry to this >> select and privileged society known only as the Brotherhood. The 45mm >> will do admirably for my purposes, thank you. >> >> Brother Chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
