Don't laugh!

[Rich3591]

OK, so I know this is probably a very unrealistic request, but unless you ask etc.

I'm looking for a clean, no scratches, no fungus 35mm telephoto lens to fit a Pentax k-mount camera, ideally between 300 and 500mm.

The problem is, I really can't afford to spend more than £50 on this...I said, "Don't laugh"

There might just be someone out there who has exactly what I'm looking for and can't be bothered with the hassle of trying to sell it, but would happily take a small token to pass it on to a good home!!!

Not holding my breath, Rich

[Blackbrook Eye]

Might I suggest getting a 'T2' to 'Pentax K' adaptor ( about £12. 00 ) and then the world of low priced lenses is at your finger tips.

Keith

[eeyore]

slightly more than you are looking to spend but T4 camera (google it we cant post comercial links here) have a tamron 70-300mm in pentax k mount for 95 notes , they also have a tokina 70-210 for 20 notes.

while mifsuds (likewise) have a tamron 70-300 for 59 notes

ffordes, srs, camtech, Ace, and LCE are all worth a look too - tho i cant see anything suitable on their websites at the mo.

[Rich3591]

Thanks for the advice guys. I'll check out the stores you suggest eeyore, the only ones I've heard of before are LCE and SRS.

Keith, I take it the T2 adapter is relatively easy to fit and when in place will take the M42 screw in lenses? What concerns me, is that when the adapter's in place, if I want to change between M42 and PK lenses in the field, am I going to be spending valuable time fiddling with the adapter between different format lens changes? If so then I'm forced to stick with one lens when I'm out, or buy a range of M42 lenses.

At the moment I've got a 28mm Soligor (£10.50), 18-55mm Pentax kit lens (came with the camera), 80-200mm Soligor (£11.50), Cosina 135mm (£10.50, still waiting for this one to turn up) and a Tamron 70-300mm (£70 brand new from Jessops).

The Tamron's OK, but I do seem to have trouble getting sharp shots at 300mm; probably my fault when focusing manually, which I prefer to do. The 80-200mm Soligor is brilliant; sharp pictures with lots of colour depth, and lovely to use too!

I do enjoy using these older lenses and I'm more than happy to work on manual. I guess I'll just have to keep looking...

Rich

[Blackbrook Eye]

It is preferable to get an adaptor for each lens, this saves swapping and changing as you go, however, from the list of lenses that you already have or are awaiting delivery of, it is my opinion that you have enough to be going on with for the time being and by the time you have got yourself sorted out with these, you will have gained enough experience to work out for yourself exactly what your requirements are. All the best with your selections and I hope you find what you are looking for.

Keith

[Rich3591]

Thanks Keith

Tell me, what are the drawbacks to using something like a 3x converter to lengthen a telephoto or a macro tube for 1:1 magnification. I've seen loads of these offered for sale at silly prices and sense a catch!

Rich

[Blackbrook Eye]

Originally Posted by Rich3591

Thanks Keith

Tell me, what are the drawbacks to using something like a 3x converter to lengthen a telephoto or a macro tube for 1:1 magnification. I've seen loads of these offered for sale at silly prices and sense a catch!

Rich

Right Rich, Regarding three times converters, the main drawbacks are, an inevitable loss of image quality, particularly when combined with budget lenses, as the converter not only magnifies the image but also any imperfections in the lens itself, by adding extra lens elements you increase the amount of glass to air surfaces which can result in a marked loss of contrast and colour rendition. The other main drawback is loss of light entering the lens which effectively reduces the maximum apperture dramatically, add to this the necessity to stop down the lens at least two stops, to help eliminate vigneting and maintain some semblance of sharpness in the image and even in good light the shutter speed required makes the set up impractical for all but static objects photographed from a tripod.
Add to the above the cost of a reasonable quality converter and you will begin to get the gist of what I am saying.

Regarding extention tubes, as the lenses you are refering to are all capable of being used in full manual mode, there are few drawbacks if any to using low cost tubes as they have no optical elements there is little to make a difference between the cheapest and the most expensive sets. If you should later want to use tubes with modern electrically opperated lenses then tubes with electrical contact continuation will be required and these can be considderably more pricey.


Keith

[Meta menardi]

I feel like the elephant in the room, that everyone walks around but doesn't want to mention, but what are you trying to do, and why? Not a hostile enquiry, but your request is very specific and has some asks (shoot me, My thesauras is on maternity leave), that are quilte exacting.

[squishy]

are you expecting a little pocket thesaurus soon then?

[Jim Ford]

To get back to the original question.

The O.P. really needs to bear in mind what John Ruskin said about looking for something cheap. This is particularly relevant to things with great ranges of cost and quality, like lenses.

"It's unwise to pay too much but it's unwise to pay too little.
When you pay too much you lose a little money, that is all.
When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything,
because the thing you bought was incapable
of doing the thing you bought it to do."

Jim