Unfair Pairs...

[stevebrot]

The inspiration for this "Game" was a recent post by bdery featuring an "unfair" comparison between two very different lenses using a very similar subject.

An unfair comparison : macro vs close focusing

In the spirit of being "unfair", I am proposing this ongoing thread for comparing that which should not be. Only three basic ground rules:

• The subject should be similar or the same for each image
• There should be a significant difference between how the images were made
• There should be some element of "unfairness" or "inappropriateness" for the comparison

The intent is not to do a technical shootout, rather it is to show off what can be done with the unconventional, the inexpensive, or the make-shift.

Here is a really unfair comparison from my backyard earlier this week...

Japanese Anemone #1


Japanese Anemone #2


Now what could be unfair about two very nice pictures of the same flower? What if I were to tell you that they were both essentially straight shots with two very different lenses? One was taken with the well-regarded and fairly expensive Pentax 77/1.8 Limited. The other was taken with the incredibly cheap (~1.5% of the 77/1.8), Russian-made Helios 44M 58/2. The shot with the Helios was cropped down somewhat to normalize the sizes between the two images; while the shot from the 77 Limited had small adjustments to both exposure (-) and contrast (+) and a small shot of ACR "clarity" so that it more closely resembled the Helios.

To help tell them apart, I can tell you that the Helios was shot at f/3.5 while the 77 Limited was shot at f/2.4.

UNFAIR!? You Betcha! How dare I pair an excellent lens like the 77 Limited with the Russian Mongrel Helios! I should at least have compared them at the same taking aperture! None-the-less...it might be better to let this sleeping dog lie and not pursue this matter any further

Steve

(Figure the resale value of my Helios just went up a few dollars or so...)

[stevebrot]

To get the game rolling along, I here is another "Unfair Pair". About ten minutes after I shot the Anemone picture in the post above, I took the first of these two shots:

One Tired Dragonfly, #1



One Tired Dragonfly, #2



This pairing is a shot at redemption for the Pentax FA 77/1.8 Limited. I spied this dragonfly perched in good light on a piece of rebar in my garden. Not wanting to waste the opportunity to get a shot at the beastie, I aimed the FA 77 at the bug and got as close as I could using AF with SR turned on. After several shots, I decided to take a chance and hustled back to exchange the FA 77 for a proper macro lens.

Now my Sigma 50/2.8 EX DG Macro is not the best tool for approaching a powerhouse dragonfly, but this fellow must have been pretty tuckered out. He very tolerantly let me grab about 25 shots in various poses on various perches at magnifications close to 1:1. Whoo! Hoo!! Finally a friendly/tired bug!

Later that evening, I was looking at the shots and doing a bit of pixel peeping. At that point I realized that the 100% crop from the 77 Limited was pretty close in quality to the best un-cropped images from the Sigma. Both of the above where hand-held using natural light.

Unfair!? You Betcha! What a nasty thing to show up a macro lens doing what it is supposed to be good at. Everyone knows that you can't do macro with the 77 Limited. It doesn't even have a close focus setting! It is like taking a Ferrari into the mud bogs to play with the Hummers. BTW...the FA 77 was at f/4.5 and the Sigma was at f/9.5. You want to know which is which?

Suggestions for future posts...
Fisheyes and teles for various subjects?
Low light/Hi Light for various subjects?
High ISO/Low ISO for various subjects?
Strobe/Available light?
Proper use/Improper use?
Makeup/No Makeup?

Again the idea is to mix the pot from both a technical and artistic point of view...SO BRING ON THE UNFAIR PAIRS!

Steve

(BTW...I am not sure what these shots say about Pentax AF...)

(Considering pairing the FA 35/2 on the K10D with the K 55/1.8 on the KX...what could be more unfair than viewing the output of a modern lens/camera with that of an antique shooting film!!! Bru...Ha! Ha! Ha!)

[Rense]

Great comparisons Steve, I like them! I will think about some contribution!

[Nesster]

Thanks for these... and a great idea for a thread!

Although, with the title, I immediately thought of a well endowed young female

[stevebrot]

Originally Posted by Nesster

Although, with the title, I immediately thought of a well endowed young female

Unfair!? You Betcha!

Steve

(Thinking to himself..."in your wildest dreams grandpa...")

[Nesster]

Micro Nikkor 55 / 3.5


View Rokkor 75 / 3.2



Unfair? You betcha!

On the one hand, a vintage Top Pro Camera Macro lens, purpose built for the 35mm format, "mounted" to a K100D. An Esteemed Micro Nikkor that sells on ebay around $100.

On the other hand, a strange medium format lens (a Minoltaflex TLR viewing lens?) mounted in a seiko shutter, taped to an extension tube. No way to focus the puppy, and no aperture markings. A total $5 mutt!


I did even things up a bit- the mutt lens is about a stop closed down while the Nikkor is wide open.

[stevebrot]

Nesster...That pairing is pretty unfair...we are likely to hear about it from both the Nikon and Minolta fora.

Looks like both lenses are well suited to the subject, however!

Steve

Unfair!? You Betcha!

[stevebrot]

Last week I generated a new set of unfair pairs and did not realize it until today. Simply put, I took two very similar photos with the K10D and Pentax-FA 35/2 of Japanese maple leaves backlit by the sun. The first photo I processed in Lightroom and was very pleased with the results. On a whim, I processed the second image using the in-camera RAW conversion utility.

Pitting a highly regarded and capable PP tool against the primitive in-camera feature?

Unfair!? You Betcha!

I will "leaf" it up to you to figure out which is which...






Steve

[stevebrot]

Early last month, I took a short road trip through eastern and southern Oregon that included a night's stay camping on the shore of Paulina Lake. About dawn, I peeked out the tent flap and saw that some good pictures were developing in the cold early morning light. I abandoned the warm sleeping bag, put on warm clothes and hustled to the car to get the cameras. The temperature was about 25 F and heavy frost was coating everything. I mounted up the KX onto the tripod and did several shots of nearby Paulina Peak reflected in the surface of the lake. I then returned to the car for the K10D and did a bunch more with it.

The KX (ca. 1975) was mounted to the Tamron 28/2.5 (ca. 1982) and was loaded with Kodachrome. The K10D was mounted to the Pentax-FA 35/2.

What do you say about pitting excellent, high end, modern technology against a relic from the past?

Unfair?! You Betcha!

Steve

(P.S. The K10D was not happy at all about operating at those temperatures...)