Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-10-2011, 10:05 AM   #16
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,157
I have always had great results with my M lenses. What's incompatible? I used my M 135/3.5 for my daughters graduation last spring and the results were superb. While the metering may be off slightly in certain conditions, a quick look at the histogram and LCD and a quick + or - adjustment and all was well. I find metering differences in ALL my lenses, including the DA's. Those of us who grew up with manual film cameras just look at statements like this and snicker.

02-10-2011, 11:10 AM   #17
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,484
snicker snicker

02-10-2011, 11:23 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by JeffJS Quote
snicker snicker

snicker
02-10-2011, 04:54 PM   #19
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
no different than K or m42 lenses for compatability
K and M42 lens work in Av mode, M dont. M stands for miniaturization, in general the miniaturization of the lens, was acheived for less quality than the equivalent K or Takumar (M42) lens.

02-10-2011, 05:01 PM   #20
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by Wired Quote
SMC Pentax-A 70-210mm F4
this is a good lens. a real good lens. you may not ‘need’ it, but if its cheap and in good shape you shouldn’t pass it up! this is one of Pentax’s best zoom lenses outside of the high end models. zoom creep can be an issue, but optically its a great lens despite not being very fast. worth a look, anyway.
02-10-2011, 05:30 PM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
K and M42 lens work in Av mode, M dont. M stands for miniaturization, in general the miniaturization of the lens, was acheived for less quality than the equivalent K or Takumar (M42) lens.
aside from m42 and a few non pentax brand lenses (ie Tamron Adaptall) that allow you to manually stop down the lenses all pre A lenses will meter at their maximum aperture if you don't use the green button just like M lenses
that's why it's called a crippled K mount AFAIK
My K 135 is no different than my M lenses, My M42 55 1.8 isn't either in Auto mode, but in manual mode i can stop down the lens, Of course this makes focussing a hell of a lot more difficult

And I would diagree on the quality some of the m's are amongst the best lenses of the era, my M28 f3.5 is barely beat by any lens of the vintage (th k is the one really serious competitor and may have a marginal edge.
02-10-2011, 05:43 PM - 1 Like   #22
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
K and M42 lens work in Av mode, M dont. M stands for miniaturization, in general the miniaturization of the lens, was acheived for less quality than the equivalent K or Takumar (M42) lens.
thats a foolish and baseless assumption, and there is no evidence of the miniaturization of the lenses having a side effect of being a lower quality. completely false in every manner. and K series lenses work just like M, so you’re information is very wrong. also, as a side note, a lot of the last generation of SMC Takumars suffered in quality due to being phased out and I would imagine most M series lenses would more than stand up to any Takumar or K series lens. you really shouldn’t be spreading false information like that, it doesn’t help the community.
02-10-2011, 06:00 PM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
thats a foolish and baseless assumption, and there is no evidence of the miniaturization of the lenses having a side effect of being a lower quality. completely false in every manner. and K series lenses work just like M, so you’re information is very wrong. also, as a side note, a lot of the last generation of SMC Takumars suffered in quality due to being phased out and I would imagine most M series lenses would more than stand up to any Takumar or K series lens. you really shouldn’t be spreading false information like that, it doesn’t help the community.
thanks for the backup Seamuis, I peeked and he doesn't have any manual lenses listed beyond a vivitar series 1

I think he should put his name on the traveling 50 list and get a taste of what the old stuff is really like
I'm certainly hooked. As much as i'd like some of the FA limiteds its a hell of a bump in price to pay for AF and limited IQ improvement over the best of the old stuff. I'd rather save the cash and buy o say a pentax 67??

02-10-2011, 06:32 PM   #24
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QUOTE=eddie1960;1380467]thanks for the backup Seamuis, I peeked and he doesn't have any manual lenses listed beyond a vivitar series 1
QUOTE]

I still own and use a TeleTakumar 400/5.6 (co-incidentally made in my birth year). I have previously owned both K and M lenses, including the M50/1.4 and the M135/3.5.

Take a look at http://www.jcolwell.ca/photography/x-arc/_SPLOSdb/SPLOSdb-2004-09-31.pdf, I count no less than 10 M lenses with a "- (minus)" rating, not a single minus rating that I can see for a K or a Takumar.
The miniaturization was forced on Pentax by the popularity of the OM-1N, and you can see from Jim Colwell's study that this did have a negative effect on lens quality. My point really is that you are better off getting a Takumar or K series lens, because of ease of use in Av mode.
02-10-2011, 06:52 PM   #25
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
QUOTE=eddie1960;1380467]thanks for the backup Seamuis, I peeked and he doesn't have any manual lenses listed beyond a vivitar series 1
QUOTE]

I still own and use a TeleTakumar 400/5.6 (co-incidentally made in my birth year). I have previously owned both K and M lenses, including the M50/1.4 and the M135/3.5.

Take a look at http://www.jcolwell.ca/photography/x-arc/_SPLOSdb/SPLOSdb-2004-09-31.pdf, I count no less than 10 M lenses with a "- (minus)" rating, not a single minus rating that I can see for a K or a Takumar.
The miniaturization was forced on Pentax by the popularity of the OM-1N, and you can see from Jim Colwell's study that this did have a negative effect on lens quality. My point really is that you are better off getting a Takumar or K series lens, because of ease of use in Av mode.
Pentax wasn’t forced to do anything really, but yes the market was moving in that trend. as for your link, I hate pages of numbers, but what is that I was looking at? ebay ratings? all these are based on used lenses? I didn’t see anything in that link (unless I missed it and you might be so kind as to show it to me) that showed any actual evidence of lower quality overall in the design or manufacture of M series lenses, due to being made smaller than K series. Asahi Optical has always done ‘small’ look to the early Takumars for your proof. there is no evidence of the ‘K’ series being better because of being larger either. any change in quality optically may be from new optical designs (of which lens size is irrelevant) from the K series (of which most were based on Takumar optical designs) but where is the evidence you keep suggesting is true that the ‘miniaturization’ of the M series is the cause of lower quality in the lenses?

and I don’t know why you keep saying that, but K series lenses and M series are identical in operation, therefore they work exactly the same on a crippled Kmount body. meaning no Av mode with a non-A lens. the reason M42 lenses work is because you can stop down the aperture. you show me a mounted K series lens that can do that on a crippled Kmount body and meter with Av mode. you absolutely have to use stop down metering with a non-A Kmount lens unless you modify the lens itself. this goes for both K and M series.
02-10-2011, 06:53 PM - 1 Like   #26
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,484
Are you Serious? There is absolutely no difference in function between M and K lenses.

02-10-2011, 06:54 PM - 1 Like   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
once again they work no differently in AV than an M lens does unless you have a model you can stop down manually like a tak with the auto manual switch or a few non Pentax k mount models.
I've had a lot of varying pentax lenses over the years, none as old as me at this point, but one or 2 that are close. I also have a lot of other lenses for other systems. The m's hold there ground. Miniaturization was nothing to do with it. In several cases the m and the k had the same optical formula
that doesn't mean you couldn't get an m that outperforms a k or vice versa.
this chart is based on one persons experience (dimitrov) for instance the M and A 35 f 2 were the same formulation AFAIK but he ranks the M - and the A *
it could just of easily gone the other way.
In any case sharpness though nice is not the only factor in a good picture, it has far more to do with the photographers ability to achieve a vision.
truly some of my favourite images from the past have been shot on lenses that were less than stellar by modern standards. I don't shoot brick wall so acuity isn't everything to me. Or the original Op for that matter he is looking for a good cheap lens. the m series fills that bill quite well.
02-10-2011, 07:02 PM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
i will however allow that k construction is generally superior. until the limited Fa's i think construction declined progressively aside from any optical characteristics

the build on a nice super tak or k is quite astounding. the m is a pretty close second given the move to size. the a's went further down this hill, and most of the f and fa models are really poor IMHO (aside from limiteds and * models which could still be pretty damn plasticky)
02-10-2011, 07:04 PM   #29
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
this chart is based on one persons experience (dimitrov)
The chart is not from Bozhidar Dimitrov, its from Jim Colwell.

Jim Colwell states on Page 3 that his lens rating system is based on his interpretation of the following sources:

- Stan Halpin's collated comments (Concentric Dial-Up Internet)
- Robert Monaghan's 3rd party 'cult classic' and other info (medfmt.8k.com/third/cult.html)
- Lars Kjellberg's Photodo optical resolution 'MTF' tests (Photodo - Photographic lens specifications, guides, discussion and reviews)
- Yoshihiko Takinami PDML optical resolution tests (Yoshihiko's PHOTO site)
- Alex Nemerovsky's collated comments (home.att.net/~alnem/html/pentax_primes.html)
- Frederick Wasti PDML optical resolution tests
02-10-2011, 07:12 PM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Jim Colwell states on Page 3 that his lens rating system is based on his interpretation of the following sources:

- Stan Halpin's collated comments (Concentric Dial-Up Internet)
- Robert Monaghan's 3rd party 'cult classic' and other info (medfmt.8k.com/third/cult.html)
- Lars Kjellberg's Photodo optical resolution 'MTF' tests (Photodo - Photographic lens specifications, guides, discussion and reviews)
- Yoshihiko Takinami PDML optical resolution tests (Yoshihiko's PHOTO site)
- Alex Nemerovsky's collated comments (home.att.net/~alnem/html/pentax_primes.html)
- Frederick Wasti PDML optical resolution tests
This of course still doesn't address the assumption that k lenses work in AV
they don't and even using an m42 in av is damn inconvenient given you still need enough light to focus properly

and looking through this comparison has several instances where optically identical lenses are rated differently ( ie m35 f2.0 and a 35f2.0)

Really for it to be truly valid you'd need a sample of say 10 lenes of each type put through a rigorous mtf field test. Given they are all old lenses and time will have taken it's toll on any of them it's kind of moot. the real test is as always can you produce a quality image with the lens. i think with most old primes you can., Old zooms however are another story. my sigma 24-70 f2.8 is better than pretty much any old zoom in the sizer category, but it's been superseded by a newer model and models in other brands. still takes a decent picture though
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!
call, chain, days, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, series, slr lens, smc, store, transfer
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:15 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