The Dead Lens Club! - Page 3

jsherman999 · 11-13-2008, 06:52 PM

.

No other dead lenses out there? Bid on a fungally challenged Tak, get one for
$15 and go to town! They're great!

More from Lake Dunked Tammy:

Not snow, lake shore foam:

70mm:

200mm:

*TourDeForce* · 11-13-2008, 10:49 PM

I am very surprised by the TAK 50mm. Some very good pictures from that lens, however a bit of light across the glass will blow your pictures out like a Hollywood ascent to the Great Reward.

Not surprisingly, looks like most people toss the rejects Jay. The crusade to promote use of sweet spots in the less expensive lenses has just expanded to include use of worn out or damaged high quality glass. I still take the $50 Tamron 28-80 out for a spin every once in a while, in fact the box is getting tattered. It mostly gets duty in the bad weather or dusty situations I encounter. Dust has been floating around inside the K100 body for the last month from one recent assignment.

Now watch the price of fungoid optics on Ebay skyrocket.

jsherman999 · 11-14-2008, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by TourDeForce

I am very surprised by the TAK 50mm. Some very good pictures from that lens, however a bit of light across the glass will blow your pictures out like a Hollywood ascent to the Great Reward.

Not surprisingly, looks like most people toss the rejects Jay. The crusade to promote use of sweet spots in the less expensive lenses has just expanded to include use of worn out or damaged high quality glass. I still take the $50 Tamron 28-80 out for a spin every once in a while, in fact the box is getting tattered. It mostly gets duty in the bad weather or dusty situations I encounter. Dust has been floating around inside the K100 body for the last month from one recent assignment.

Now watch the price of fungoid optics on Ebay skyrocket.

Yes, testament to the power of the S-M-C Tak 50 1.4.

Here are a few more from dunkie, which my no longer be eligible if it gets
a good cleaning, which it may soon...

acbees · 11-15-2008, 10:46 AM

Jay,
I'm certainly glad you started this thread! I don't have any pictures to offer at this time, but after I saw how bad your 50mm Takumar looked in that shot I dug out my old Pentax M 50mm 1.4 that came with my first Pentax, the ME, that i got in the late '70's. It had gotten pretty beat up by carrying it around in too many trucks for too many years, especially the 5 years I hauled logs in Sheridan, Wyo. Put it on the K20 today and took a few sample shots inside the house and the dog (too nasty to be outside today). Looks like it's going to go back in my bag! Might get another few years of hauling it around.

Thanks again,
Arvin

jsherman999 · 11-15-2008, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by acbees

Jay,
I'm certainly glad you started this thread! I don't have any pictures to offer at this time, but after I saw how bad your 50mm Takumar looked in that shot I dug out my old Pentax M 50mm 1.4 that came with my first Pentax, the ME, that i got in the late '70's. It had gotten pretty beat up by carrying it around in too many trucks for too many years, especially the 5 years I hauled logs in Sheridan, Wyo. Put it on the K20 today and took a few sample shots inside the house and the dog (too nasty to be outside today). Looks like it's going to go back in my bag! Might get another few years of hauling it around.
Thanks again,
Arvin

Very, very glad this thread caused you to dig that up!! The M 50 1.4 can give you
some awesome stuff. A little effort with old lenses can give results that knock
your socks off.

As much as I like Dunkie's output, I feel like I have to work to get really good
results - But I can throw Fungal-50 on and take a picture of a phone book and it's
good to me. Go figure.

Have fun with your 'new' 50mm!

.

*heliphoto* · 11-15-2008, 12:10 PM

Jay, did you throw it in that tub with the leaf tea when you were done shooting?

Have you found a place that will CLrA (Clean, Lube, remove Algae) it? It still looks sharp as can be and really good.

ftpaddict · 11-15-2008, 12:24 PM

The Fungal-50 looks like the lens of the year to me. Or was it just the photographer who made the lens look so good?

jsherman999 · 12-03-2008, 07:23 PM

.

Dunkie (lake-dunked Tamron 70-200 2.8) took a car ride in 19 degree weather with me today.

200mm f/4

200mm f/4

130mm f/3.5

200mm f/4

200mm f/3.5

200mm f/2.8

Stratman · 12-03-2008, 07:40 PM

This shot is from a Chinar 135 mm F2.8 bought on eBay for $12.00. The aperture blades are slower than molasses, and it won't stop down past F 5.6, but it produces some nice images, shot this shot the day I picked it up at the post office.

Takumar "A" 70-200 F4

Here is what the front element looks like ( oil inside somehow )

And here is an image from it @ F8 ( not sure of focal length, but I believe it was at 200mm )

jsherman999 · 12-29-2008, 04:52 PM

.

Strat, wow, those oils spots look big enough to refract - amazing you don't see those in the images, nice shot.

OK, I guess I attract these things, because I thought I got the Steal Of The Century last night...

However, the blades are stuck wide open, which I found out when I brought
it to the zoo today (shooting macro in 10-degree wind chill isn't as fun as it sounds,
so I went to the indoor part of the zoo to shoot something, at least...)

I emailed Eric, so hopefully this can be salvaged for a still-overall-good-cost.

So here are the shots, all wide-open, of course:

crop:

Here's why I think the Viv/Kiron 100/105 is so good as a portrait lens wide open:

crop of above left:

Jester_rm · 12-30-2008, 01:04 PM

I think the next time I buy a lens, my first act will be to drop it in a bucket of scummy water a couple of times...

jsherman999 · 12-30-2008, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by Jester_rm

I think the next time I buy a lens, my first act will be to drop it in a bucket of scummy water a couple of times...

Actually, I just sent the Viv 100 and Tamron 70-200 (dunkie) off to Eric this afternoon -
So they may be leaving the 'Dead Lens Club' in the next couple weeks, we'll
see what he thinks.

I was going to send my Fungal-50, but it just has too much character as-is.

.

Jester_rm · 12-31-2008, 12:06 PM

So, does that mean we'll have to start a "Return of the Living Dead Lens Club"?

Or maybe just an "Undead Lens Club" would work...

Either way, I need to get out and take more shots...this is my busy season at work and I don't seem to have much time to do anything nowdays.

jsherman999 · 01-10-2009, 04:08 PM

.

Got the Tammy back from Eric couple days ago - there's a lens group within the lens
that can't be removed or disassembled, it's manufactured and bolted together as
a unit in the factory, apparently (which is why Tamron judged it "not economically
feasible to repair.") Eric was able to clean the rest of the elements, however, and
it's about 80% cleaner than it was. (Eric didn't charge me, but I'll probably drop
him a couple buck if it tests out OK.)

Took it to the zoo today for a real test run (most are all ISO 800)

ISO 200, f/4, crop:

f/2.8, crop

ISO 200, f/6.7, tight crop

Mechan1k · 01-10-2009, 04:59 PM

Nice work Eric indeed ... at least he was able to clean it up a lot more for you Jay.

Not sure if it is ... but in your 2nd last shot it shows a spot in the sky on the right hand side ... but you may just have a dust bunny on your sensor.

Have you tried shooting towards a lightsource yet with "dunkie"??? I do remember you saying that that was the only time you'd see the problems.