How does Pentax photograph its own lenses?

Syb · 01-08-2008, 02:05 PM

[Admin edit: post moved to the lens forum, missing info filled in]

This is partly off-topic, though it concerns the new lens, too. The [database photos] all have a pentaxforums watermark,so my naive presumption is that Mo or another lucky fellow gets to make a pic of them all. And maybe even do some testshots?

Naive, I know. Of course some of such shots are provided to us by Pentax corporation.

Well, then my question is: what camera would Pentax use to make pictures of its own lenses?

I like their sharpness and detail. Any ideas?

procyon · 01-08-2008, 02:21 PM

Well, looking at the new 18-250 picture, I suspect it might be a 3D render not a photo.
Lots of pictures of high-tech gadgets, cars, etc. you can get from official sources are renders not photos, to avoid all imperfections (dust, minuscule imperfections in manufacturing, etc.).

Syb · 01-08-2008, 02:26 PM

Isn't that suspicious? That a photography firm does not trust its own products?

I thought it should be perhaps a 645D camera, or something else very sophisticated. But a 3d render?

Btw: what is that? A 3d render?

Thanks,

**jfdavis58** · 01-08-2008, 03:17 PM

Computer Aided Drafting-CAD; in 3 dimensions with simulated light (ray-tracing or similar)====>render/rendering.

While a rendered image might be used in preproduction or introductory hype, the 'after' stuff is probably shot by either an in-house group using the same cameras the company sells or farmed out to an agency that uses medium format equipment--make a guess.

Originally posted by Syb

Isn't that suspicious? That a photography firm does not trust its own products?

I thought it should be perhaps a 645D camera, or something else very sophisticated. But a 3d render?

Btw: what is that? A 3d render?

Thanks,

HGMonaro · 01-08-2008, 04:10 PM

more likely on a Large format view camera (maybe with a digital back) to control the DOF exactly.

carpents · 01-08-2008, 04:55 PM

Are you talking about the ones here at PentaxForums.com? I would suppose most of them are Mo's shots, but some of them are mine and I'm sure other members submitted theirs.

If you're interested in gear shots, I have a whole gallery of them:
Equipment

Most of them were taken with the DFA 100/2.8 Macro and the lighting is pretty simple: tons of it. Daylight, flash, incandescent...basically as much as I can get to bring out shadows. Stuff like:

(No flash, just ambient sunshine and incandescent lights to fill. Background is a white board.)

I recently did some darker ones, using my 24mm lens to accentuate the proportions of the lens on the camera:

(Click for bigger size. This was just two incandescent lights and a 5 second exposure at f/10. The background is a piece of warm grey matting board.)

**Marc Langille** · 01-08-2008, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by carpents

Are you talking about the ones here at PentaxForums.com? I would suppose most of them are Mo's shots, but some of them are mine and I'm sure other members submitted theirs.

I believe more than a few of them are donated for the forum's use - I provided two FA* images - the FA*200/4 Macro and FA* 300/2.8 (Mo/Adam has since acquired the FA* 300/2.8). Adam and I "tag-teamed/begged/pleaded" another seller of an FA* 250-600/5.6 to let the forum have an image of the ones he used for his sale. He was very obliging...

Quote:

I recently did some darker ones, using my 24mm lens to accentuate the proportions of the lens on the camera:

(Click for bigger size. This was just two incandescent lights and a 5 second exposure at f/10. The background is a piece of warm grey matting board.)

Wow... that is mighty purdy Sean! What's that cost - around the price of a FA* 300/2.8 (body only I mean)????

Isn't that a film body? Sweet...

EDIT: ah, you bought a digital back for it - very nice! What do you think of the image quality?

Last edited by Marc Langille; 01-08-2008 at 05:40 PM. Reason: looked at Sean's gear page

carpents · 01-08-2008, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by 35mmfilm_user

Wow... that is mighty purdy Sean! What's that cost - around the price of a FA* 300/2.8 (body only I mean)????

Isn't that a film body? Sweet...

EDIT: ah, you bought a digital back for it - very nice! What do you think of the image quality?

Thanks Marc,

Well, you know me - I'm a cheap b@stard, so I most certainly didn't pay what it is worth. The images are pretty sweet. ISO 800 is clean as a whistle, ISO 1600 is about equivalent of ISO 640 on the K10D. It's all-manual everything, so it is slower to use than the Pentaxes. I'm still getting used to the split-prism focus screen - when it works it is brilliant but sometimes it only gets in the way, but it could be because I never used one before.

And oh yeah - the lenses aren't as good as the best Pentax ones. What do you think about that?!?

**Marc Langille** · 01-08-2008, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by carpents

Thanks Marc,

Well, you know me - I'm a cheap b@stard, so I most certainly didn't pay what it is worth. The images are pretty sweet. ISO 800 is clean as a whistle, ISO 1600 is about equivalent of ISO 640 on the K10D. It's all-manual everything, so it is slower to use than the Pentaxes. I'm still getting used to the split-prism focus screen - when it works it is brilliant but sometimes it only gets in the way, but it could be because I never used one before.

Well, I thought you might be cheap, but not a b@stard...

Thanks for the information!

Quote:

And oh yeah - the lenses aren't as good as the best Pentax ones. What do you think about that?!?

Wow... OK, now I feel no Leica envy! I feel much better about my gear, especially the DA 12-24, and the 3 FA* lenses...

too funny...

01-08-2008, 02:05 PM	#1
Syb Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Near Utrecht, Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,221	How does Pentax photograph its own lenses? [Admin edit: post moved to the lens forum, missing info filled in] This is partly off-topic, though it concerns the new lens, too. The [database photos] all have a pentaxforums watermark,so my naive presumption is that Mo or another lucky fellow gets to make a pic of them all. And maybe even do some testshots? Naive, I know. Of course some of such shots are provided to us by Pentax corporation. Well, then my question is: what camera would Pentax use to make pictures of its own lenses? I like their sharpness and detail. Any ideas?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Photograph your hobbies :)	Taff	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	39	03-04-2010 11:18 PM
Who says you can't photograph trains	Photo Tramp	Post Your Photos!	5	03-09-2009 12:44 PM
Some ideas to photograph small venues car shows with your Pentax DSLR	ebooks4pentax	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	06-07-2008 07:58 PM
Not a very good photograph	Ed in GA	Post Your Photos!	9	05-18-2008 05:45 PM

01-08-2008, 02:21 PM	#2
procyon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Tallinn Posts: 265	Well, looking at the new 18-250 picture, I suspect it might be a 3D render not a photo. Lots of pictures of high-tech gadgets, cars, etc. you can get from official sources are renders not photos, to avoid all imperfections (dust, minuscule imperfections in manufacturing, etc.).

01-08-2008, 02:26 PM	#3
Syb Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Near Utrecht, Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,221 Original Poster	Isn't that suspicious? That a photography firm does not trust its own products? I thought it should be perhaps a 645D camera, or something else very sophisticated. But a 3d render? Btw: what is that? A 3d render? Thanks,

01-08-2008, 03:17 PM	#4
jfdavis58 Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316 Photos: Gallery Posts: 887	Computer Aided Drafting-CAD; in 3 dimensions with simulated light (ray-tracing or similar)====>render/rendering. While a rendered image might be used in preproduction or introductory hype, the 'after' stuff is probably shot by either an in-house group using the same cameras the company sells or farmed out to an agency that uses medium format equipment--make a guess. Originally posted by Syb Isn't that suspicious? That a photography firm does not trust its own products? I thought it should be perhaps a 645D camera, or something else very sophisticated. But a 3d render? Btw: what is that? A 3d render? Thanks,

01-08-2008, 04:10 PM	#5
HGMonaro Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Melb. Aust Posts: 840	more likely on a Large format view camera (maybe with a digital back) to control the DOF exactly.

01-08-2008, 04:55 PM	#6
carpents Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: West Chester, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,420	Are you talking about the ones here at PentaxForums.com? I would suppose most of them are Mo's shots, but some of them are mine and I'm sure other members submitted theirs. If you're interested in gear shots, I have a whole gallery of them: Equipment Most of them were taken with the DFA 100/2.8 Macro and the lighting is pretty simple: tons of it. Daylight, flash, incandescent...basically as much as I can get to bring out shadows. Stuff like: (No flash, just ambient sunshine and incandescent lights to fill. Background is a white board.) I recently did some darker ones, using my 24mm lens to accentuate the proportions of the lens on the camera: (Click for bigger size. This was just two incandescent lights and a 5 second exposure at f/10. The background is a piece of warm grey matting board.)

01-08-2008, 05:21 PM	#7
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	Originally posted by carpents Are you talking about the ones here at PentaxForums.com? I would suppose most of them are Mo's shots, but some of them are mine and I'm sure other members submitted theirs. I believe more than a few of them are donated for the forum's use - I provided two FA* images - the FA200/4 Macro and FA 300/2.8 (Mo/Adam has since acquired the FA* 300/2.8). Adam and I "tag-teamed/begged/pleaded" another seller of an FA* 250-600/5.6 to let the forum have an image of the ones he used for his sale. He was very obliging... Quote: I recently did some darker ones, using my 24mm lens to accentuate the proportions of the lens on the camera: (Click for bigger size. This was just two incandescent lights and a 5 second exposure at f/10. The background is a piece of warm grey matting board.) Wow... that is mighty purdy Sean! What's that cost - around the price of a FA* 300/2.8 (body only I mean)???? Isn't that a film body? Sweet... EDIT: ah, you bought a digital back for it - very nice! What do you think of the image quality? Last edited by Marc Langille; 01-08-2008 at 05:40 PM. Reason: looked at Sean's gear page

01-08-2008, 05:48 PM	#8
carpents Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: West Chester, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,420	Originally posted by 35mmfilm_user Wow... that is mighty purdy Sean! What's that cost - around the price of a FA* 300/2.8 (body only I mean)???? Isn't that a film body? Sweet... EDIT: ah, you bought a digital back for it - very nice! What do you think of the image quality? Thanks Marc, Well, you know me - I'm a cheap b@stard, so I most certainly didn't pay what it is worth. The images are pretty sweet. ISO 800 is clean as a whistle, ISO 1600 is about equivalent of ISO 640 on the K10D. It's all-manual everything, so it is slower to use than the Pentaxes. I'm still getting used to the split-prism focus screen - when it works it is brilliant but sometimes it only gets in the way, but it could be because I never used one before. And oh yeah - the lenses aren't as good as the best Pentax ones. What do you think about that?!?

01-08-2008, 05:54 PM	#9
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	Originally posted by carpents Thanks Marc, Well, you know me - I'm a cheap b@stard, so I most certainly didn't pay what it is worth. The images are pretty sweet. ISO 800 is clean as a whistle, ISO 1600 is about equivalent of ISO 640 on the K10D. It's all-manual everything, so it is slower to use than the Pentaxes. I'm still getting used to the split-prism focus screen - when it works it is brilliant but sometimes it only gets in the way, but it could be because I never used one before. Well, I thought you might be cheap, but not a b@stard... Thanks for the information! Quote: And oh yeah - the lenses aren't as good as the best Pentax ones. What do you think about that?!? Wow... OK, now I feel no Leica envy! I feel much better about my gear, especially the DA 12-24, and the 3 FA* lenses... too funny...