I Bought A 16-45 And A 50-200 Today

Mike Bokeh · 10-19-2007, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by axl

I'd really apreciate that too, I compared those two in shop and it didn't seem to me as such big difference, but would love to see propper wide angle comparison shot on some landscape or so....
do you have any? pleeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaase....

Regarding the wide angle shots, I'll do my best, Axl.

They will be done properly, i.e.:

1.) Camera on a tripod.
2.) Same aperture
3.) Taken moments apart

Mike

darkstorm82 · 10-19-2007, 03:52 PM

might as well try different arperture.. f4, f5.6, f8, f11 for both
something out of focus in the scene? to compare bokeh?

Mike Bokeh · 10-19-2007, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by darkstorm82

might as well try different arperture.. f4, f5.6, f8, f11 for both
something out of focus in the scene? to compare bokeh?

Good idea, Darkstorm.

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 10-21-2007, 07:51 AM

Well, I'm off to do some lens tests.

I don't know how much I'll get done, but there should be photos of:

1.) Fighter planes
2.) Cameras
3.) Candy
4.) Musical instruments
5.) Monsters (don't be scared)

More later.

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 10-21-2007, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by ricardobeat

You did crop the 16mm shot, right? Do you mind posting a comparison between the wide angles on both lenses?

OK, this is for ricardobeat, and axl, and anyone else that's interested.

A comparison between the 18-55 and the 16-45. Both lenses at their widest angle of view.

Camera on a tripod in the same location, shots taken seconds apart at dusk, ISO 400 for all.

18-55 @ 18mm @ f4.0, 1/125 sec

16-45 @16mm @ f4.0, 1/125 sec

I also have f5.6 and f8.0, but to save space, I'll just post f8.0 unless someone really wants to see f5.6

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 10-21-2007, 06:40 PM

18-55 @ 18mm @ f8.0 1/30 sec

16-45 @ 16mm @ f8.0 1/30 sec

Now, we'll go inside.

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 10-21-2007, 07:00 PM

This is a room which is approximately 30 feet wide by 50 feet long. The camera is on a tripod about 10 feet inside the entrance.
18-55 @ 18mm @ f8.0 .5 sec

16-45 @ 16mm @ f8.0 .5sec

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 10-21-2007, 07:58 PM

Here's an odd shot.
18-55 @ 18mm @ f8.0 .3 sec

16-45 @ 16mm @ f8.0 .3 sec

That's it for tonight; more tomorrow.

So, what do you guys & gals think of the two lenses?

Mike

axl · 10-22-2007, 01:06 AM

Originally posted by Mike Bokeh

OK, this is for ricardobeat, and axl, and anyone else that's interested.
......
Mike

Many thanx Mike,
finaly I can see it as I wanted it. Really big thank you...
And I have to say that I didn't think that there'll be such a difference, maybe I'll have to reconsider my next purchase

Mike Bokeh · 10-22-2007, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by axl

Many thanx Mike,
finaly I can see it as I wanted it. Really big thank you...
And I have to say that I didn't think that there'll be such a difference, maybe I'll have to reconsider my next purchase

You're very welcome, axl.

I'm glad to have been able to help.

Plus, doing this test gave me something to do, and I learned a little about these two lenses.

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 10-22-2007, 05:04 PM

Now, about the monsters I mentioned.

So, I'm minding my own business, doing some lens tests with my 6x7 as the subject...

When suddenly I hear this roaring.

IT'S THE EV MONSTERS!

They'll bother any photographer they can, because they stink at taking pictures themselves!

HEY! STOP STOPPING-DOWN MY LENS!

WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT MIRROR LOCKUP? GET OUT OF THERE!

Long story short, it cost me $20 to get rid of them!

But I did get some good close-ups.

I'll post them later.

Mike

All the above photos taken with the 16-45.

Mike Bokeh · 10-22-2007, 06:54 PM

Here are some close-ups.
16-45 @ 45mm @ f4.0 1/125 sec ISO 400 for all.

16-45 @ 45mm @ f8.0 1/20 sec

16-45 @ 45mm @ f16 1/6 sec

I also have f5.6 and f11, but I think everyone gets the idea.

I have to agree with all those who said that this is a sharp lens. I think this is pretty good for a zoom lens.

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 10-22-2007, 07:50 PM

Enough green!

Now let's see how it handles warm colors.
16-45 @ 45mm @ f11 1/5 sec

16-45 @ 45mm @ f4.0 1/125 sec

Even though the top photo @ f11 is sharper, I think this lens has pretty good color reproduction wide open @ f4.0.

Forgive me for not rotating these two photos, but they seem to lose something when rotated.

One more wide shot of the hall from the entrance.
16-45 @ 16mm @ f11 .7 sec

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 11-23-2007, 11:39 AM

A few Thanksgiving pictures, all taken with the 16-45.
Your turkey is served!
20mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz 36C-2 flash unit with Omnibounce difuser.

Before.
45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz flash as above.

After.
45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz flash.

Mike

Mike Bokeh · 11-23-2007, 11:49 AM

You want pictures of pretty girls? We have pictures of pretty girls.
45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz 36C-2 flash with Omnibounce difuser.

Same photo as above with in-camera digital soft filter 1 added.

45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz flash.

Mike

10-22-2007, 06:54 PM	#27
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Here are some close-ups. 16-45 @ 45mm @ f4.0 1/125 sec ISO 400 for all. 16-45 @ 45mm @ f8.0 1/20 sec 16-45 @ 45mm @ f16 1/6 sec I also have f5.6 and f11, but I think everyone gets the idea. I have to agree with all those who said that this is a sharp lens. I think this is pretty good for a zoom lens. Mike Last edited by Mike Bokeh; 10-22-2007 at 07:55 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I bought the cutest little FF camera today	little laker	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	14	06-04-2010 06:26 PM
Bought my first ltd today! 70 f/2.4	PentaxPoke	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	02-10-2009 10:40 AM
I just bought a used K10d so here's some photos from today	pasipasi	Post Your Photos!	5	09-17-2008 07:32 AM
Just bought my K10D today	Mister E	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	02-02-2008 07:06 AM
Bought a tripod, today.	NLAlston	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	1	05-14-2007 05:33 PM

10-19-2007, 03:41 PM	#16
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Originally posted by axl I'd really apreciate that too, I compared those two in shop and it didn't seem to me as such big difference, but would love to see propper wide angle comparison shot on some landscape or so.... do you have any? pleeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaase.... Regarding the wide angle shots, I'll do my best, Axl. They will be done properly, i.e.: 1.) Camera on a tripod. 2.) Same aperture 3.) Taken moments apart Mike

10-19-2007, 03:52 PM	#17
darkstorm82 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Quebec, Canada Posts: 59	might as well try different arperture.. f4, f5.6, f8, f11 for both something out of focus in the scene? to compare bokeh?

10-19-2007, 07:15 PM	#18
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Originally posted by darkstorm82 might as well try different arperture.. f4, f5.6, f8, f11 for both something out of focus in the scene? to compare bokeh? Good idea, Darkstorm. Mike

10-21-2007, 07:51 AM	#19
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Well, I'm off to do some lens tests. I don't know how much I'll get done, but there should be photos of: 1.) Fighter planes 2.) Cameras 3.) Candy 4.) Musical instruments 5.) Monsters (don't be scared) More later. Mike

10-21-2007, 06:19 PM	#20
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Originally posted by ricardobeat You did crop the 16mm shot, right? Do you mind posting a comparison between the wide angles on both lenses? OK, this is for ricardobeat, and axl, and anyone else that's interested. A comparison between the 18-55 and the 16-45. Both lenses at their widest angle of view. Camera on a tripod in the same location, shots taken seconds apart at dusk, ISO 400 for all. 18-55 @ 18mm @ f4.0, 1/125 sec 16-45 @16mm @ f4.0, 1/125 sec I also have f5.6 and f8.0, but to save space, I'll just post f8.0 unless someone really wants to see f5.6 Mike

10-21-2007, 06:40 PM	#21
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	18-55 @ 18mm @ f8.0 1/30 sec 16-45 @ 16mm @ f8.0 1/30 sec Now, we'll go inside. Mike

10-21-2007, 07:00 PM	#22
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	This is a room which is approximately 30 feet wide by 50 feet long. The camera is on a tripod about 10 feet inside the entrance. 18-55 @ 18mm @ f8.0 .5 sec 16-45 @ 16mm @ f8.0 .5sec Mike

10-21-2007, 07:58 PM	#23
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Here's an odd shot. 18-55 @ 18mm @ f8.0 .3 sec 16-45 @ 16mm @ f8.0 .3 sec That's it for tonight; more tomorrow. So, what do you guys & gals think of the two lenses? Mike

10-22-2007, 01:06 AM	#24
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by Mike Bokeh OK, this is for ricardobeat, and axl, and anyone else that's interested. ...... Mike Many thanx Mike, finaly I can see it as I wanted it. Really big thank you... And I have to say that I didn't think that there'll be such a difference, maybe I'll have to reconsider my next purchase

10-22-2007, 04:38 PM	#25
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Originally posted by axl Many thanx Mike, finaly I can see it as I wanted it. Really big thank you... And I have to say that I didn't think that there'll be such a difference, maybe I'll have to reconsider my next purchase You're very welcome, axl. I'm glad to have been able to help. Plus, doing this test gave me something to do, and I learned a little about these two lenses. Mike

10-22-2007, 05:04 PM	#26
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Now, about the monsters I mentioned. So, I'm minding my own business, doing some lens tests with my 6x7 as the subject... When suddenly I hear this roaring. IT'S THE EV MONSTERS! They'll bother any photographer they can, because they stink at taking pictures themselves! HEY! STOP STOPPING-DOWN MY LENS! WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT MIRROR LOCKUP? GET OUT OF THERE! Long story short, it cost me $20 to get rid of them! But I did get some good close-ups. I'll post them later. Mike All the above photos taken with the 16-45.

10-22-2007, 07:50 PM	#28
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	Enough green! Now let's see how it handles warm colors. 16-45 @ 45mm @ f11 1/5 sec 16-45 @ 45mm @ f4.0 1/125 sec Even though the top photo @ f11 is sharper, I think this lens has pretty good color reproduction wide open @ f4.0. Forgive me for not rotating these two photos, but they seem to lose something when rotated. One more wide shot of the hall from the entrance. 16-45 @ 16mm @ f11 .7 sec Mike

11-23-2007, 11:39 AM	#29
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	A few Thanksgiving pictures, all taken with the 16-45. Your turkey is served! 20mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz 36C-2 flash unit with Omnibounce difuser. Before. 45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz flash as above. After. 45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz flash. Mike

11-23-2007, 11:49 AM	#30
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	You want pictures of pretty girls? We have pictures of pretty girls. 45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz 36C-2 flash with Omnibounce difuser. Same photo as above with in-camera digital soft filter 1 added. 45mm @ f5.6 @ 1/90 sec Metz flash. Mike