Quote: hangu Just curious as to why people use medium format lenses on Pentax DSLRs, they're more expensive, heavier, generally slower, no auto focus or aperture and require an adapter.
I shoot with MF 67 lenses on my K20d. I have posted this elsewhere @ the forum, but will run through it again. I have coupled the SMC 6 x 7 165mm 2.8 to my Tamron BBAR MC7 SP 2x tele, along with 67 to k adapter. This gives me a 330mm f 5.6 lens. I'll, for example, compare it to my (just sold) K300 f 4.
First myth: 67 lenses cost more than K-mount. While this may be true in general, it surely is not true in this particular case. I bought the 67 165mm for under a $100. The Tamron adapter came in another deal for a Sigma 400, for free. The 67 to K adapter I have used on several lenses, so I would not place its $70 cost all on this lens setup, since I derive more utility with it out of other setups. So, for less than $100, I have a Pentax 330mm 5.6--Show where I can buy better, for less?
Second Myth: 67 lenses are heavier. My Pentax 330mm 5.6 is actually lighter than my K 300 f4 was. Sure the K 300 is a stop faster. But 1 stop faster is all the K 300 had to offer over the Pentax 330mm
Third Myth: Manual focus is inferior to Auto focus. There is a small minority of the shooters out there who actually prefer shooting MF over AF--
believe it or not. I am not trying to say there is no place for AF in my shooting; rather, I am trying to say I prefer manual focus over auto focus. I truly relish in the fact that I, and not the technology, am responsible for the focus of my shot.
Fourth Myth: Auto metering is superior to manual metering. Again for the same reason laid out in the 3rd myth, I prefer manual metering. I love spinning the K20 wheels and adjusting the focus ring--it brings much more meaning to my shooting than does simply pushing a button. Can anyone else out there relate to this? Sure, if I did this for a living, with a paying customer as a boss, I would have to accommodate. But that is just it--I do it for love. For this reason, i do not think, even if I got good enough, I would ever do this for a living--that would ruin it for sure.
Fifth Myth: Adapter shooting is inferior: Why is the Takumar Club the most popular club here???
BONUS: The Pentax 330mm 5.6 has a tri-pod mount built into the 67 to K adapter--the K 300 f4 had no tri-pod mount.
Back to my hybrid MF, Pentax 330mm 5.6. I love the extraordinary bokeh long lenses bring into close up shots. The K 300 had a CF distance over 12 feet I believe. This MF setup allows me to CF down to 5.25 feet--this is an exceptional ability, particularly for under $100, and it
provides exceptional BOKEH along with it.
Finally though. as usual, the proof is in the pudding, or IQ. this $100 MF hybrid setup provides superior IQ to the K300. That, in itself, is enough to justify shooting with it. The shots need no PPing and are very sharp.
Of course, there are intangibles as well. What else is LBA all about--it is not about rational behavior. It is simply cool shooting MF lenses on crop sensor.
But the number one reason for shooting MF lenses on Pentax crop sensor is---drum roll please........................................................
BECAUSE YOU CAN! Reasons like this, which defy reason, is the reason I came to Pentax in the first place. I much more easily could have followed the C or N herd.
If none of this works to convince you I have a God given right to shoot MF lenses on crop sensor, then look at the pics below, which I have already scattered throughout our forum--btw, no PPing here, just converted/downsized Raws with slight sharpness compensation for DSing--shots range from 2.8 to f16 on the aperture ring & no cropping.
Also, though i do not understand the laws of physics involved, the shots I take at very small apertures do not seems to suffer much from diffraction, at least in no way to the degree my ff and crop sensor lenses do. I shoot the Pentax 330mm @ f 16 on the aperture ring and get great dof, with great IQ.