Having slid across from Pentax, I believed I had a feel for the used lens market. Both N. and P. have several series of bayonet mount lenses going back to 1979 more or less, with 3rd parties adding both prime and zoom lenses. Since the K mount has been forsaken by most of those parties in recent years, it seemed clear that the F mount would have even more choices!
AmIRite?
Well?
-er NotSoMuch.
A larger supply of gear is apparently overcome by demand from the much larger Nikon user base, so few options are available. And the most recent 3rd party items are aimed at hi-ticket buyers, so even 50 percent off is above my budget - worse yet, the f/1.4 primes and f/1.8 zooms are massive!
So, on to the right-sized f/2.8 primes.* I want 'em small to avoid confusing a prime with the 28-105 (I truly believe that is possible now!), so small and relatively 'slow' is good, and zooms are low on my list. Since I know little about Nikon gear I browsed a few review sites for glowing praise of Nikkor 20/24/28mm primes.
Wow. Guess the DA Limiteds spoiled me, as reviews are pleasant rather than enthusiastic about many of these. And oh yes: demand v. supply means they aren't cheap,not even the elder D series whose 28-105 zoom is beloved. Well, strongly beliked at least.
I also did not prepare myself for dealing with owners of the 2nd largest camera brand. They strongly dislike things Pentaxians have long accepted, like loud focus motors ** or with primitive features like front elements that rotate & mess up polarizing filter settings. (Quick tip: focus first.)
- All I wanted was a 20-24mm, a fast 35 and maybe a 50mm. Doing so would cost $500 on a lucky day, so plan A is out.
- How about a wide xx-35 zoom? They are either exotic monsters or 1980s relics made to be cheap and left out to die. Another plan bites the dust.
- No plan C came to mind. Well the Nikkor 24-50mm D reviews well from 24-35mm, shall I waste space carrying around the extra 15mm anyway?
Then i encountered a Tamron 166, or maybe 266. It's a 20-40mm f/2.7-3.5. A what?! Sounds like a pentax design with such strange numbers, but it's pretty compact (albeit dense!) and actually reviews.. pretty well? Stranger still, it's comfortably below $200 in a few cases. I found a copy of the later model 266, which has a gold ring like my 70-300 and distance scale on the nose unlike the window view on the 166. It also came with its hood, which helps with its main problem of flare.
Be it so ordered.
And with that in hand, a 50/1.8 (FX) becomes a sensible item to seek!
 |
| model 266 on the left, 166 right |
* Did I mention the DX/FX thing? Like Pentax' DA/FA labeling, but again for an audience 50x larger!! A good half dozen times I found a deal on a 35/1.8 for example, only to see the DX code at the penultimate period. Terminology matters!
**
Give
us
a
break, folks. Nikon AF motors sound like a vacuum cleaner compared to the high-speed drill that is Pentax.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Oh yes: the 17mm Sigma will be on the the block if the 20-40mm works out. That will defray the 50's expense. Unless the 17 wins, the 20-40 leaves and I get a 35 instead.. oh was that out loud?
No comments:
Post a Comment