The F Club! - Page 3

memira · 11-19-2008, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by Stratman

Takumar F 28-80 does sports !! This lens is identical to the Pentax F 28-80, maybe just different coatings, but I rather like it...

The difference between the Takumar-F (Pentax-F) non SMC and the SMC ones is and always was a highly discussed topic... Is the only difference the lack of SMC coating...? According to Bojidar Dimitrov's Resources (Thank you so much Bojidar for your GREAT page !!!!!!) the whole construction is different...

F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Pentax-F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Anyway, Great Pics (and the proof that it is indeed possible to make sports Pics with Pentax

)

AndrewG NY · 11-19-2008, 10:56 AM

First, the obligatory camera lens porn:

Pentax-F Zooms, extended
Pentax-F Zooms, collapsed

And the fauna, this one with F 35-70 f/3.5-4.5, @70mm, f/5.6.
First spring flowers: PJM Rhododendon

Class A · 11-20-2008, 02:03 AM

Originally Posted by jsherman999

What do you mean by 'unmanaged seamonkey' version?

You can add a "Color Management" add-on to Firefox. With it, Firefox will respect colour profiles and display images with correct colours (e.g., respecting Adobe colour space instead of presenting such images using an sRGB interpretation).

For Seamonkey (basically a combination of Firefox, Thunderbird, and a Page Composer, but not quite; I believe it is a fork, continuing the integrated Mozilla suite with Firefox/Thunderbird features) no such add-on exists so it just displays all images as if they were sRGB encoded (which most are).

I happened to look at your images using both browsers and the Firefox colours were noticeably more intense.

Charles Hueter · 11-20-2008, 03:33 PM

The F 50mm f/1.7 was my first autofocus lens.

K100D, f/2:

ME Super, Kodak Gold ISO200:

jsherman999 · 11-20-2008, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by Class A

You can add a "Color Management" add-on to Firefox. With it, Firefox will respect colour profiles and display images with correct colours (e.g., respecting Adobe colour space instead of presenting such images using an sRGB interpretation).

For Seamonkey (basically a combination of Firefox, Thunderbird, and a Page Composer, but not quite; I believe it is a fork, continuing the integrated Mozilla suite with Firefox/Thunderbird features) no such add-on exists so it just displays all images as if they were sRGB encoded (which most are).

I happened to look at your images using both browsers and the Firefox colours were noticeably more intense.

Odd, I just installed Seamonkey, and looked at the images in this thread side-by-side with firefox, and there's absolutely no difference - do I need to turn on sRGB or something with Seamonkey?

.

Class A · 11-20-2008, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by jsherman999

Odd, I just installed Seamonkey, and looked at the images in this thread side-by-side with firefox, and there's absolutely no difference - do I need to turn on sRGB or something with Seamonkey?

Odd. I just compared the two browsers again and

the colours look exactly the same

. The Firefox image is rendered much larger but other than that they look identical.

I guess Seamonkey was playing up in a strange way when I noticed the difference. I have some problems with the browser. It sometimes stops loading pages or loads them incompletely only. I would have switched to Firefox a while ago but I have zillions of passwords stored in Seamonkey which Firefox doesn't import (although it should).

Sorry for the false alarm, but I'm absolutely sure when I made the comparison the first time that there was a difference. Now the Seamonkey image is as vivid as the Firefox one. Still like it.

jsherman999 · 11-23-2008, 06:31 PM

.

f/2, On K100D. One of the last shots before his first (slight) haircut today!

Stratman · 11-23-2008, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by memira

The difference between the Takumar-F (Pentax-F) non SMC and the SMC ones is and always was a highly discussed topic... Is the only difference the lack of SMC coating...? According to Bojidar Dimitrov's Resources (Thank you so much Bojidar for your GREAT page !!!!!!) the whole construction is different...

F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Pentax-F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Anyway, Great Pics (and the proof that it is indeed possible to make sports Pics with Pentax )

looks the the Takumar F is a clone from the second link you posted, here is the Page for the Takumar, Identical specs...
Takumar-F 28-80/3.5-4.5

*arpaagent* · 12-17-2008, 12:05 PM

Hey, I am sure that some of you have encountered the same problem with F-series, where the rubber half-ring on the barrel begins to come up. Has anyone found a good solution to this problem, using some type of glue, or rubber cement maybe? I'd rather not botch my lens up, since it is nearly perfect other than the rubber coming up.

247nino · 12-22-2008, 01:09 PM

I'll play ...

the only photo I have of my lens I once had...
F Zoom 70-200 f3.5-5.6

This lens was awesome, but I didn't find it attractive. I realized that how the lens looked almost didnt matter because I was looking through it and not at it.

It was a nice lens but I stopped using it and it left my stable with a very cute girl who wanted it and bought it off craigslist.

anyway here are a few samples that I love...