My feel about their quality is based on some of the lenses I have sold for a
friend, he still owning lots of Pentax gears, he complain about the plastic
feel of the 16-45. The 50/1.4 and 135/2.8 doesn't look smart to my eyes.
Many of their zooms are from Tokina, the 16-45, 50-135/2.8, 12-24... Have a
look on the Tokina 50-135 and 12-24 you will see what I mean, may be you
will like the look of Pentax but the Tokina version look better to my eyes.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry"
>
> The new zooms have been going through teething pains because they are
> the first to be produced in a brand new factory, suppliers not supplying
> what was promised, and being built at too fast a pace due to
> overwhelming demand. This, of course, is being corrected, and is not
> acceptable to Pentax.
>
> The zooms at PMA were mock-ups, so any opinion based on that is useless.
>
> Even so, hands-on judgement creeps in here in such non paid-off sites as
> Photozones:
>
> "The 50-135mm is a member of the professional grade DA* family and the
> build quality is on an accordingly high level thanks to quality
> materials and weather-sealing."
>
> Or the cheap kit zooms:
>
> "Despite the very low price tag the build quality of the lens is
> surprisingly decent. Naturally the outer construction is still based on
> lots of plastics but its quality is quite fine with relatively tight gap
> tolerances and there's even a metal mount."
>
> Your comment is the absolute first I've heard that they "look ugly",
> but, again, that's that beholder thing again.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|