Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-15-2011, 12:43 AM   #46
Veteran Member
DanielT74's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,377
John, I think this is more due to the front focus and the shallow depth of field at f1.4. I guess I will have to shoot some more comparison shots (as well as some between Pentax 200/4 macro and the Leica 180/3.5 that Ben has asked for) to see anything conclusively.


Last edited by DanielT74; 10-15-2011 at 01:28 AM.
10-16-2011, 02:37 AM   #47
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by DanielT74 Quote
John, I think this is more due to the front focus and the shallow depth of field at f1.4. I guess I will have to shoot some more comparison shots (as well as some between Pentax 200/4 macro and the Leica 180/3.5 that Ben has asked for) to see anything conclusively.
Oh, Daniel, you have got both, the 200 and the 180? That's great.

And I also agree: comparing fast lenses wide open is either academic, using flat, printed targets or hard to achieve, as one will hardly ever reach the exact same focal plane with these lenses on three dimensional object.

Ben
10-18-2011, 12:03 AM   #48
Forum Member
kanzlr's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vienna
Posts: 92
just unpackaged her:



what a huge beast. I had the 35/2 for Nikon, but somehow expected the 25 to be smaller...oh my
10-18-2011, 01:15 AM   #49
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by kanzlr Quote
just unpackaged her:



what a huge beast. I had the 35/2 for Nikon, but somehow expected the 25 to be smaller...oh my
The CZ 21 is even larger
So I even think about switching from pentax to NEX where I can use adopted Biogon 21 ZM

10-18-2011, 01:17 AM   #50
Forum Member
kanzlr's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vienna
Posts: 92
lol, I just completed the transition from Nikon FX -> Leica M8 -> Ricoh GXR -> K5
size wise the K5 is nice, but the ZK almost perverts it
10-18-2011, 01:47 AM   #51
Veteran Member
DanielT74's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,377
Leica lenses can be very big too and are invariably heavier than they look. The 35/1.4 is a massive beast - bigger than our A*85/1.4 and a lot heavier. The 100/2.8 macro is larger and heavier than any other macro in that range that I've tried. But honestly I don't find this such a huge problem. Well until you get to the 6x7 600/4 which incidentally arrived a few days ago. Postage alone was close to $200.
10-18-2011, 03:19 AM   #52
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,704
QuoteOriginally posted by Ben_Edict Quote
One Leica R lens, that always stood out for me, due to its sharpness was the 180/3.4 Apo. This is one great lens, which I would have loved to compare to the Pentax 200/4 Macro (the Leica isn't a macro, though), because the Pentax 200 Macro is reportedly (and supported by the images I have seen, made with that lens) the best long glass availabe - if you can afford one.
Add that to my long list of regrets over selling basically my entire Leica R system (I kept two fast 50's for my 50mm lens collection though) The Leica Telyt-R 180mm f/3.4 APO was among the lenses I had to part with, I never got a chance to compare it to the legendary FA*200mm f/4 though I do have some lens test data shot using both lenses on film that strongly suggests the FA* lens is superior - by a small margin, the differences could be expressed in decimal fractions of arc seconds.
11-01-2011, 06:41 PM   #53
Veteran Member
DanielT74's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,377
QuoteOriginally posted by Ben_Edict Quote
Oh, Daniel, you have got both, the 200 and the 180? That's great.

And I also agree: comparing fast lenses wide open is either academic, using flat, printed targets or hard to achieve, as one will hardly ever reach the exact same focal plane with these lenses on three dimensional object.

Ben
Hiya Folks

A quick stopover in the park with the APO-Telyt 180/3.5 and A*200/4 macro. It was a very overcast morning, not a lot of contrast but at least not harsh. The major difference is of course going to be that the A200/4 has an extremely shallow depth of field, so on one hand you can control depth of field a lot more particularly with near objects and on the other it is hard to get moving objects in focus. But there is actually quite a difference between the way the lenses render, in terms of colour, contrast, etc. What do you think?

Depth of field at the same aperture:



colour and redition:
pentax on the left:


pentax on the right (sorry):


pentax on the right:



full files at:

https://picasaweb.google.com/103430830473331312618/LeicaAPOTelyt18035AndPent...IbAYQ-8KVQjlg#


Last edited by DanielT74; 11-01-2011 at 09:44 PM.
11-02-2011, 01:35 AM   #54
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,704
The Leica 180mm f/3.4 Elmarit looks a trifle warmer in rendering than the pentax - at least to my eyes.

I did a little more digging through my lens test data and I uncovered something rather interesting the lens test negatives for a Leica summicron-R 180mm f/2 APO - I will have to compare these results with 180mm f/3.4 APO and the FA*200mm f/4 , and for good measure my own nikkor 200mm f/2G ED VR - though I have to shoot the nikkor lens on film to make the results completely apples-apples.

Last edited by Digitalis; 11-02-2011 at 01:55 PM.
11-02-2011, 09:58 AM   #55
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 74
Hello DanielT74. Thanks for sharing the photo comparisons. I, like Digitalis, believe the Leica to be a bit warmer in my eyes.

As one who is lusting, in true LBA form, for some Leica lenses, I am most interested in the comments here.
11-02-2011, 12:41 PM   #56
Veteran Member
DanielT74's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,377
Yes, I agree that it's warmer. Also highlights seem a bit gentler.

Last edited by DanielT74; 11-09-2011 at 07:55 PM.
11-09-2011, 08:47 AM   #57
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,007
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
I simply don't understand why some people make a big deal of an AA filter. It is there for a reason, and any blurring of the image it produces can easily be corrected with capture sharpening. On the other hand, not having an AA filter can result in nasty color moire that can be very tricky to correct. This is a non-issue, IMO. Falk Lumo has made the same point repeatedly in these forums.

Rob
The AA filter will reduce image resolution all the time. Not all images show high frequency pattern producing moires. Moires may be corrected by software. No/less AA filtering allows for better sharpness. The little advantage will be little compared to working with larger format sensor - almost all have no AA filter btw.
11-09-2011, 09:27 AM   #58
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 74
QuoteOriginally posted by DanielT74 Quote
Yes, I agree that it's warmer. Also highlights seem a bit gentler.

If you are interested I will likely be letting go of some of my Leica gear. Still deciding which (just got too much equipment).
Hello DanielT74. Thanks for the note about the possibility of selling some of your Leica gear. I might be interested in at least knowing about what you wish to sell. In the last 45 days, I bought two lenses and need to somehow or another gather more funds. Otherwise, all I can do is dream for now!

My master plan is to get at least one Leica R lens to put a Leitax adapter on. Most likely will start with a 50mm Summicron f2 R lens.
11-10-2011, 06:27 AM   #59
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 824
Original Poster
Dang, the Aussie is selling Leica gear shipping would be very expensive to me. sniff
11-10-2011, 07:20 AM   #60
Veteran Member
DanielT74's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,377
Nah... I suspect it is just an idle threat. I might just sell the 19/2.8 because I don't use this focal length much. The others I really can't bear losing at the moment.
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!
k-mount, lenses, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens, taks
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Carl Zeiss Jena 75-300mm has anyone experience with it on pentax k-x davidvandoren Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 0 03-06-2010 07:09 AM
Leica summicron 90/f2 converted or Carl Zeiss ZK 85/1.4?? tthana50 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 10-13-2009 06:08 AM
Leica lenses on Pentax Substitute Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 11-12-2008 05:02 AM
What would you do if you could mount old Leica and Zeiss lenses? morfic General Talk 12 08-12-2008 10:36 PM
Any experience with Zeiss Flektagon 20mm f4 Not Registered Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 10-30-2007 09:26 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:33 PM. | 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