Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-12-2011, 07:02 AM   #151
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,149
It is largely preference, as many new AF zooms can give very nice IQ. Much of the debate depends on how you learned the ropes of photography. If you started out (like I did) before cameras even had built-in meters your habits and reflexes handle manual focus easily. However, you can mess up those habits by shooting AF much, making it hard to resume MF. I find just staying with MF easier for me overall, as I'm too old to adapt.
So for SLR use I still prefer film, and have been enjoying an H1a more than ever. For rangefinder use Leica has the answer in the M9, as I can use it exactly like the old film models. At $7k for the M9 body, it's not a matter of cost; and they are selling as many as they can make, both of bodies and MF lenses. (One to two year wait for many of their lenses.) My M9 body broke my retirement gift budget, but it gets a lot more use than my K-5.
I think a digital Pentax LX could tap into the same market of folk wanting a digital version of their favorite camera; but even at M9 sales volume that would still be a small market for Pencoh.

08-12-2011, 07:29 AM   #152
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
QuoteOriginally posted by TomB_tx Quote
I think a digital Pentax LX could tap into the same market of folk wanting a digital version of their favorite camera; but even at M9 sales volume that would still be a small market for Pencoh.
Pentax LXd would be surely something i would like, simplified digital SLR, compact and fullframe
08-12-2011, 12:49 PM   #153
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 381
One of the things to note is that the performance of a 50mm is very different on a 35mm film camera to that of a DSLR with a cropped sensor. 50mm is a bit wide, even, on full frame. This means you are always using a slightly longer focal length for the same field of view, when shooting on full frame, which means in turn, lovely shallow DOF effects are available if you desire. However, some of these bokeh shots are a bit overdone. I do like the sharpness of my M 100, stopped down to f8, on some FP4+ or Acros....then again, I love the agility of my little Oly E420, which feels like a ME Super...
08-12-2011, 02:59 PM   #154
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by hoojammyflip Quote
50mm is a bit wide, even, on full frame.
I must disagree there. On 135/FF the 'normal' focal length is 43mm, so 50mm is a short tele, and has been recognized as such for a long time. 50-55mm became the FF 'kit' focal length because of SLR mirror-box constraints, but that's another story. Anyway, depending on which APS-C sensor is involved, 'normal' (or wide-normal) is 28-30mm and the 50-55mm rough equivalent is 35-37mm (long-normal).

Another definition of 'normal' is WHATEVER WE'RE USED TO. When I put a 100/3.5 EL on bellows on my K20D for a few days, it starts to feel normal -- and very liberating, given its huge focus range, 10cm / 4in to infinity. To Zenit users, 58mm was normal, rather like 40mm on APS-C. To Olympus XA users, 35mm was normal, rather like 24mm on APS-C. Normal can be whatever we want. But on 135/FF, 50mm ain't wide.

08-12-2011, 04:42 PM   #155
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: westerly
Posts: 794
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Another definition of 'normal'...
RioRico & normal ...........ummmm...........


Last edited by .a.t.; 08-13-2011 at 10:09 AM.
08-12-2011, 05:12 PM   #156
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by all thumbs Quote
RioRico & normal ...........ummmm...........

Oh, that's my middle name: RioNormalRicoh -- yes, I'm as norbal as can be!
08-12-2011, 10:28 PM   #157
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Oh, that's my middle name: RioNormalRicoh -- yes, I'm as norbal as can be!
Vote for rio rico - Normal is his middle name! .... ah, back to the future - those were the movies....
08-12-2011, 11:20 PM   #158
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 143
I know this might sound sacrilegious, but if I could convert my three Pentax FA limiteds to smooth, full-time manual focus (they're the only three auto-focus lenses I currently own), I think I would do it.

Why? Because (a) my success rate with manual focus is higher than with autofocus; (b) I can generally work as fast with manual focus as with autofocus; and (c) I shoot more film than digital these days

(The 'scratchiness' of these lenses in manual mode can be distracting--especially the 43mm.)

I realize that this would blow the resale value of these lenses, but it would make my shooting more enjoyable.


Last edited by Byrd-2020; 08-12-2011 at 11:34 PM.
08-13-2011, 02:24 AM   #159
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
QuoteOriginally posted by ll_coffee_lP Quote
I love my f/1.4's, but I'll continue to play devil's advocate:

How often do you shoot any of your fast lenses below f/2.8? Be honest (with us and yourself)...

To have the equivalent focal lengths to my DA50-135mm I would need the following prime lenses:
50mm, 77mm, 85mm, 100mm, 120mm, 135mm
- so to get the same focal lengths I'm lugging around a heap of lenses that in many cases cost about the same as the DA50-135mm.

I certainly agree with you about having a fast lens (or two) in your kit. I much prefer primes over zooms, but the differences aren't like they used to be.

c[_]
All the time. Infact I shoot my lenses wideopen probably 90% of the time.... and thats being reserved. Its most likely closer to 95%

Personally I don't see why you'd need all of those primes to replace the DA* lens. So far as I can tell 50mm/85mm/135mm is all you'd need (even that might be a bit much. I could get away with just two with little issue).


edit: woops just realized how old this thread actually is I'll sum up my opinion with this.

I buy/use old MF primes because they are fast, high quality optics, built like mini tanks, less things to break down on me (longevity), down right cool, a conversation peice/ice-breaker, CHEAP, fun to hunt for, and ultimately a joy to use. They make photography in many ways fun for me, and more of a challenge with greater reward/satisfaction for achieving a good shot. I could never own the same type of glass I do in any other mount.
Go Pentax

Last edited by yeatzee; 08-13-2011 at 02:30 AM.
08-13-2011, 02:59 AM   #160
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by vrrattko Quote
Vote for rio rico - Normal is his middle name! .... ah, back to the future - those were the movies....
Oh, that was my name long before the movies. And I only saw the first.

QuoteOriginally posted by yeatzee Quote
I buy/use old MF primes because they are fast, high quality optics, built like mini tanks, less things to break down on me (longevity), down right cool, a conversation peice/ice-breaker, CHEAP, fun to hunt for, and ultimately a joy to use. They make photography in many ways fun for me, and more of a challenge with greater reward/satisfaction for achieving a good shot. I could never own the same type of glass I do in any other mount.
Go Pentax
That's about right. And they're cheap. And there's tons of exotic glass out there just waiting to be discovered, some rather strange. Not all are Pentax-mount, so there's also the joy and challenge of mount conversion. And they're cheap. And some old MFL's just do stuff that modern lenses can't or won't. And sometimes things just don't work, and there's the heartbreak of deciding whether to keep trying, or just let them go; but at least they're cheap. Oh, did I mention that they're cheap? The kind I buy are, anyway.
08-13-2011, 05:51 AM   #161
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,149
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
50-55mm became the FF 'kit' focal length because of SLR mirror-box constraints, but that's another story.
Another definition of 'normal' is WHATEVER WE'RE USED TO.
We were used to 50 as normal ever since the Leica model A of 1926. Leica used the 50 Elmar f3.5 for the 24x36mm frame as the standard lens until the 1950s, and it bcame standard for nearly all other makes as well, before there was a mirror box consideration.
However, many early SLRs did nudge to 58mm as normal - like my Asahiflex, so the mirror did have some effect; but SLRs are easier to focus with longer lenses, so that may have influenced the choices as well.
I tend to use 85-90 more on my SLRs and 35-50 on my rangefinders. But since wides for SLRs have improved, I use 20-24 more on SLRs to avoid the external viewfinder needed with my Leicas. Rangefinder folk stress that you can focus an ultrawide better on a rangefinder, but with the DOF this is isn't as critical.
BTW, I still use a 1941 50 Elmar f3.5 on my Leica M9 at times, and it can still give amazing results!
08-13-2011, 01:21 PM   #162
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
QuoteOriginally posted by Byrd-2020 Quote
I know this might sound sacrilegious, but if I could convert my three Pentax FA limiteds to smooth, full-time manual focus (they're the only three auto-focus lenses I currently own), I think I would do it.
nothing sacrilegious here, but should this be my case I would probably sell FA limiteds and invest money in some Contax/Yashica Zeiss lenses and Pentax K / A gems. The former ones are easy on par with limiteds (i hope the lightning would not strike me now)
08-13-2011, 03:48 PM   #163
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 32
10 reasons? Sorry, can't think of one.

I guess I'm going against the grain here for a lot of folks but when I started shooting back in the early 70's with my honeywell I fell in love with photography. But time, kids cost of film etc., made me park the camera. Not to mention a lot of what I shot was a little soft. Great shots some said but not my style.
Enter the k20D. Blows my mind. Hard to get a soft shot for me but I did read the manual! But folks don't realize it's not really a camera anymore. It's a computer. Nothing like shooting film anymore.
I like clean, crisp, sharp shots. Just my style. If a pic is a little soft... it's gone. Not that I'd dump all of them. Some have their place but generally I don't keep many of those. Some pics here are great but a little soft for me. I'd dump them. Some are crisp and clean. Outstanding!
My feeling is you can make a sharp pic softer, but making a soft shot sharper... well, not impossible, but it ain't easy.
You can't beat AF if you know how to use it. The most idiotic thing in the world is pressing the button halfway down to AF. Well... duh. If you don't know how to shut that silly feature off you'll likely have a lot of soft pics. Yes, you can shut it off. How do you AF without it? (pssst. There's an AF button by your thumb) And once in focus... yes, you can lock it there. So no more little breeze blowing that leaf in front of you and blurring your shot. (Who knew?)
But to each his own. Everyone has their own style. Some love some peoples work, some hate it. Doesn't matter. Shoot for you, not for the masses. Just remember, cameras died out years ago. We now shoot with computers. And we have to learn to program.
These were shot either with the kit lens or a sigma DG 70-300 1:4/5.6 (that I adore). And they are all as shot. Love them or hate them... doesn't matter to me. I like them.
500px / Gary O

And yes, at 300mm it can and was hand held. Now some love sigma, some hate it. I say it depends. You can get a lemon with anything. Mine is certainly no lemon. At least in my opinion. YMMV
08-13-2011, 04:32 PM   #164
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
QuoteOriginally posted by garyoa1 Quote
snip
So whats your opinion on F/1.2 lenses?

edit: welcome to the forum
08-13-2011, 05:07 PM   #165
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 32
Well the string was essentially MF vs AF. But as far as lenses/speed/F/whatever themselves...no opinion.
I do have a few old MF from the Honeywell Pentax and a couple other F lenses but they gather dust. I do have some adapters and tried them on the K20 but since I have (to me) so much luck with the AF... there they sit. These old eyes just don't focus like in the old days so the AF does wonders for me. Do I screw some up? Oh you betcha! But with MF I'd never be able to get them to pop like they do with the AF.
I have great results (for me) with the kit 18-55 and the Sigma. Don't see any reason to carry 8000 lenses and then have to change for this, change for that. Especially when that "quick! Click it or miss it" shot comes up.
But again.... this is ME. I use what works for me. If you have a use for something else. Go for it. I'm not saying what I use is best for everyone. Again, I'm no photo guru, but I know what I like and what works for me. In fact if you start throwing numbers and specs at me you'll lose me in the dust! It's just a hobby for me and I enjoy it. And I think... that's what it's all about.
(thanx for the welcome!)
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
auto, auto focus, focus, focus primes, k-mount, lenses, pentax lens, primes, reasons, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What does "auto" mean on older manual focus lenses? jonhock Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 12-03-2009 11:32 AM
Auto-Focus Lenses on Manual Bodies pdx138 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 7 08-22-2009 06:47 PM
9 Reasons To Manual Focus duron Photographic Technique 12 12-08-2008 02:05 PM
Manual or Auto Focus paolo g Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 06-27-2008 10:55 AM
Manual and Auto Focus JCSullivan Photographic Technique 51 12-15-2007 06:54 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:36 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top