Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-24-2011, 08:27 PM   #16
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by ozlizard Quote
Thanks for the input. I guess it might laso be worth considering a prime. FA 77 springs to mind for only a little more than the Sigma 17-50. Or even the Sigma 85 (when it comes out in Pentax mount), although a lot more $ than the others. What about the Sigma 24-70, any good?
Not as good as the Tam 28-75, which I think would be an ideal 1 lens solution.

The FA77 is awesome, but should be added later, it's not exactly flexible.

05-24-2011, 08:41 PM   #17
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by ozlizard Quote
Thanks for the input. I guess it might laso be worth considering a prime. FA 77 springs to mind for only a little more than the Sigma 17-50. Or even the Sigma 85 (when it comes out in Pentax mount), although a lot more $ than the others. What about the Sigma 24-70, any good?
the Sigma 85 is already available in Pentax mount.
05-25-2011, 01:00 AM   #18
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
Wow ! A DA*15 - 60 ? Sounds like a great range

Agree with what has been said - you will get the best results from primes - some gorgeous MF lenses out there if you have the patience. However those aside then the Tamron 28-75/2.8 seems to be the best option for you (better than the 24-70), the 17-50 is definitely too wide no matter which version you buy.

Are the children to be posed in a controlled environment ?

If so other lenses to consider would be primes or zooms in the 50 - 100mm range, just throwing a few out there :
Sigma 50-150/2.8
Pentax *50-135/2.8
DA*70/2.4 Ltd.
FA 77/1.8 Ltd.
Sigma 70/2.8
Any fast, sharp 50/55

MF Lenses - lot of Pentaxes or maybe consider the fantastic Voigtlander range; 50/1.8, 58/1.4 or 90/3.5. Also the new Samyang 85. Huge range of used MF lenses to choose from though TBH.
05-25-2011, 01:37 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,421
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I had one for about a year and never had any problems with the sdm but admit that I was concerned. I currently have 1 SDM lens and that is the DA* 300mm. I am reluctant to through out that kind of money the DA* lenses demand with a 1 year warranty and problems they have.
May you never have any problems with your DA* 300 - I might buy a DA 15 or 70mm primes if and when I could afford to but never another SDM lens. I bought one here in the forums that had already been serviced (SDM motor replaced). I thought it would be safe to buy, but who would have thought that the replacement motor would go on to fail as well. It's like having car that's been recalled and serviced, only to have the recalled problem flaring up again, or so it feels like to me. I have lost all confidence in Pentax SDM lenses, and I won't go near one, new or used.

Thanks,

05-25-2011, 03:24 AM   #20
Veteran Member
pop4's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: YMML
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,877
QuoteQuote:
DA 16-50* or Sigma 17-50?
I had to make that choice once, and for me, it was a no-brainer: the Sigma 17-50. There were too many stories of SDM failure (and also repeated failure) for my liking, and I didn't want to be yet another statistic. And I've been happy with my Sigma 17-50/28 thus far.
And as mentioned above, the Sigma 85/1.4 is already available in Pentax mount; I've got one.

Last edited by pop4; 05-25-2011 at 03:30 AM.
05-25-2011, 06:08 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bridgetown West Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 879
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
Wow ! A DA*15 - 60 ? Sounds like a great range
Sorry about my dyslexia, I also suffer from insomnia, so I lay awake all night wondering if there is a dog

On a more serious note...I used a M50mm mf lens on my first photo shoot (borrowed). I found it difficult to use the mf with children. When I got the focus right the results were fantastic, sharp as a tack, but I also missed a lot. I might post a sample later. This is what got me thinking about a prime. If you use your feet you can do without a zoom. The question is, what is the best "bang for buck"?
05-25-2011, 06:18 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bridgetown West Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 879
Original Poster
A sample pic. Viewed at 100% in photoshop you can see the fine hairs on her lip.

\
05-25-2011, 07:25 AM   #23
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by ozlizard Quote
Sorry about my dyslexia, I also suffer from insomnia, so I lay awake all night wondering if there is a dog

On a more serious note...I used a M50mm mf lens on my first photo shoot (borrowed). I found it difficult to use the mf with children. When I got the focus right the results were fantastic, sharp as a tack, but I also missed a lot. I might post a sample later. This is what got me thinking about a prime. If you use your feet you can do without a zoom. The question is, what is the best "bang for buck"?
Actually that's not quite true as by using your feet you are changing the perspective - however I doubt that is a major issue in studio portraiture.

05-25-2011, 07:42 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
Actually that's not quite true as by using your feet you are changing the perspective - however I doubt that is a major issue in studio portraiture.
Zooming changes the perspective and FOV; moving the camera changes the framing of the subject, but not the perspective.
05-25-2011, 07:46 AM   #25
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
Zooming changes the perspective and FOV; moving the camera changes the framing of the subject, but not the perspective.
Sorry Steve - not right. Check out this link, it's got the best examples and explanation I've seen.

Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial) - Canon Digital Photography Forums
05-25-2011, 07:57 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
Sorry Steve - not right. Check out this link, it's got the best examples and explanation I've seen.

Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial) - Canon Digital Photography Forums
Yeah, you're right, my bad; That's what I get for not paying attention. *sigh*. Sorry.

I know that stuff, too; thinking about the situation in a studio setting had me thinking about the wrong problems. Like maintaining the proper FOV to get a full length model shot in the studio while still cropping in the edges of the 9' paper sweep! - which can be a challenge. That is, the perspective changes as you zoom *while maintaining a constant subject size*; whereas when using primes, you back up till you get the perspective you want and then pick the lens. Of course, that's not really "zooming with your feet" in this context.

Good catch, too.
05-25-2011, 08:03 AM   #27
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
Yeah, you're right, my bad; That's what I get for not paying attention. *sigh*. Sorry.

I know that stuff, too; thinking about the situation in a studio setting had me thinking about the wrong problems. Like maintaining the proper FOV to get a full length model shot in the studio while still cropping in the edges of the 9' paper sweep! - which can be a challenge. That is, the perspective changes as you zoom *while maintaining a constant subject size*; whereas when using primes, you back up till you get the perspective you want and then pick the lens. Of course, that's not really "zooming with your feet" in this context.

Good catch, too.
Oh that's a problem I haven't come across yet. Guess you need a big studio !

I always keep that link because that is how someone corrected my misconception and it has come in handy many times. It can be very confusing at times .. even to those, like you, that know it anyway !
05-25-2011, 08:13 AM   #28
Site Supporter
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,705
QuoteOriginally posted by ozlizard Quote
A sample pic. Viewed at 100% in photoshop you can see the fine hairs on her lip.

\
a gentleman never discusses the hairs on a woman's lip.
05-25-2011, 08:16 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
Oh that's a problem I haven't come across yet. Guess you need a big studio !

I always keep that link because that is how someone corrected my misconception and it has come in handy many times. It can be very confusing at times .. even to those, like you, that know it anyway !
When you don't do it every day anymore *sigh*. I miss the studio, I miss the models, but I don't miss the art directors - nor the 'feast or famine' nature of the business

Terminology and context can become confusing, because it's reasonable to discuss it in both ways. It's like the FF/APS-c debate... do you compare based on the same FOV (subject framing), or the same focal length? Depending how you frame the question, the answers change. Do you talk about "zooming with your feet" vs "zooming with the lens" in terms of subject size and FOV, or distance to subject ( which give opposite answers ).
05-25-2011, 09:02 AM   #30
Veteran Member
MrPetkus's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 388
FWIW, I use the Tamron 28-75 for almost all portrait work. I've done a lot of kids with it. It's so razor sharp that I frequently need to soften the images and pull back on clarity. But I'd much rather have a sharp lens that I may need to soften than vice versa. When I want thin DOF I use an old Pentax M50/1.4. For stage performance and the like I reach for the Tamron 70-200/2.8. And wide angle goes to the Pentax 15/4. I would like something between the 15 and 28 (21/3.2?) then I'd have the perfect kit. And the 31 - just because...
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, lens, pentax, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: Sigma 150-500mm HSM, 150mm MACRO HSM, Sigma 18-250 HSM, Sigma 10-20mm HSM mackloon Sold Items 7 05-01-2011 02:25 AM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 100-300 f4. Sigma 1.4 Teleconvertor. Sigma UV filter. Cases, Caps, Box & garethwebber Sold Items 3 12-03-2010 03:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax AF-540FGZ Flash, Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6, Sigma 170-500mm F5-6.3 davebest Sold Items 12 06-25-2009 02:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:57 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