Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-29-2012, 02:09 PM   #16
Senior Member
Vindemiatrix's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: las vegas
Posts: 209
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
It's not necessarily that the DOF is increased - you can see that my leaf shot, the in focus areas are still a little soft and bloomy, but my bench shot lacks the soft and bloomy-ness (specifically, look at the bench). And this has been true in my experience with using that lens.

Your 1.4 shot of the hose looks a heckuvalot more like missed focus - do you have any other samples?

@Gabro - the 1.6 shot isn't full size, so it's a bit tougher to judge, but it looks sharp. The DA*55 is supposed to be almost as sharp (or just a little sharp, sample variation) than my Sigma 50 - and I know my Sigma 50 is extremely sharp once stopped down to F2.8+

No is not missed focus it is really that soft at 1.4 in all light conditions, this is a 100% crop and the hose was about 4 feet away.

11-29-2012, 02:10 PM   #17
Veteran Member
oxidized's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA - Delaware
Photos: Albums
Posts: 434
QuoteOriginally posted by Vindemiatrix Quote
here is a quick comparison shot. this is in bad bright sunshine 100% crops . first at 1.4 second at f8 as you can see there is no sharpeness whatsoever on the first shot,and it was on focus .
Given the harsh light, i think it looks okay. I would read this:
Pentax SMC DA* 55mm f/1.4 SDM - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
according to the resolution charts the lens is rather soft at F1.4. Also your image looks very similar to the one he provided at F1.4. His might be "slightly" sharper but I think the harsh lighting in your example may explain the difference.
11-29-2012, 02:10 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Milan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 320
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
It's not necessarily that the DOF is increased - you can see that my leaf shot, the in focus areas are still a little soft and bloomy, but my bench shot lacks the soft and bloomy-ness (specifically, look at the bench). And this has been true in my experience with using that lens.

Your 1.4 shot of the hose looks a heckuvalot more like missed focus - do you have any other samples?

@Gabro - the 1.6 shot isn't full size, so it's a bit tougher to judge, but it looks sharp. The DA*55 is supposed to be almost as sharp (or just a little sharp, sample variation) than my Sigma 50 - and I know my Sigma 50 is extremely sharp once stopped down to F2.8+
I'm sorry, I think I have mistake something, since I have not cropped the image! Try this All sizes | Muji | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
11-29-2012, 02:12 PM   #19
Senior Member
Vindemiatrix's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: las vegas
Posts: 209
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gabro822 Quote
Have you made fine adjustments wide open (1.4)? Are those pictures made after the adjustments?

Yes the pictures are made after adjustments and the lens nailed the focus on both shots. It's just that is very soft at 1.4 .

11-29-2012, 02:13 PM   #20
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 323
QuoteOriginally posted by Vindemiatrix Quote
Ok here 100% crop of a 1.8 shot. There is a great improvement from 1.4.
Hmm.. the 100mm WR Macro is definitely very sharp wide open, but my DA 55mm is extremely sharp wide open as well. In fact, I am convinced it is sharper than my 77mm & 31mm limited. It did need a -6 backfocus adjustment though....

Maybe compare shots taken through live view so that front or backfocus is ruled out?

edit: actually, looking through my photos, I don't have many at f1.4, most were at f1.8 so it's hard to say....
11-29-2012, 02:16 PM   #21
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by Vindemiatrix Quote
Yes the pictures are made after adjustments and the lens nailed the focus on both shots. It's just that is very soft at 1.4 .
Mmm.. if it's perfectly in focus, then seems really quite soft (or weak to CA) to me. Only issue I would have with that is - manual focusing is done in liveview with the lens wide open, so it may make it tricky to focus. Otherwise, I'd use it at F2 maximum...

Or get another copy >.>

I know my Sigma 50 1.4 is a bit bloomy wide open, but it definitely isn't as crazy as your hose crop.

QuoteOriginally posted by gabro822 Quote
I'm sorry, I think I have mistake something, since I have not cropped the image! Try this All sizes | Muji | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
I went to the sizes and chose the largest one. However, it's still not full size (unless your camera is 3MP )

You can do what Vindemiatrix did and crop the image (2000x1000 should do) and upload to flicker. However, even the downsized sample looks reasonable and not like Vindemiatrix's 1.4 shot.
11-29-2012, 02:37 PM   #22
Senior Member
Vindemiatrix's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: las vegas
Posts: 209
Original Poster
I put the camera on a tripod and used live view av mode for these right here, results are the same not only in these but in all the shots I took wide open, indoors or out with good light or not.

First 3 are 1.4 1.8 and 2.2

second are 1.4 1.6 and 2

I just wonder if this is normal, or I should keep sending lenses back until I find the miraculous sharp at 1.4 da 55 lolz
Attached Images
     

Last edited by Vindemiatrix; 12-17-2012 at 04:51 PM.
11-29-2012, 02:40 PM   #23
Senior Member
Vindemiatrix's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: las vegas
Posts: 209
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gabro822 Quote
I have set a +5 too on my k5. But in LV it it very sharp also at 1.6. Usually I don't use it at 1.4. Super sharp after f2.0.
But I have a question: is it possible that the 55 is sharper than the fa31? I have both and have this feeling.
If the 55 is sharper I am definetely not getting the 31

11-29-2012, 02:43 PM   #24
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
The NV energy tag looks much more reasonable to me for 1.4. I guess the super harsh sunlight really throws the image out of whack. If the result is consistent to that energy tag at 1.4, it's pretty normal in my opinion.

I.e. - use F2 unless you can control the conditions for shooting =p
11-29-2012, 02:45 PM   #25
Senior Member
Vindemiatrix's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: las vegas
Posts: 209
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Dirtistasty2 Quote
Hmm.. the 100mm WR Macro is definitely very sharp wide open, but my DA 55mm is extremely sharp wide open as well. In fact, I am convinced it is sharper than my 77mm & 31mm limited. It did need a -6 backfocus adjustment though....

Maybe compare shots taken through live view so that front or backfocus is ruled out?

edit: actually, looking through my photos, I don't have many at f1.4, most were at f1.8 so it's hard to say....
Great I am saving my cash by not buying the 77 and 31 LOLz. I was stacking this lens against the 43 ltd but I decided on this one for round bokeh at all apertures , I guess after all a 1.4 aperture is not really something very practical in everyday photography or something I absolutely need to use, but the whole thing of being so soft wide open just rubs me the wrong way I guess haha.
11-29-2012, 02:55 PM   #26
Senior Member
Vindemiatrix's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: las vegas
Posts: 209
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
The NV energy tag looks much more reasonable to me for 1.4. I guess the super harsh sunlight really throws the image out of whack. If the result is consistent to that energy tag at 1.4, it's pretty normal in my opinion.

I.e. - use F2 unless you can control the conditions for shooting =p
I am gonna find some time to compare it with the takumar 50 1.4. I am pretty sure as far as sharpeness wide open the tak performs better if not the same.
11-29-2012, 02:58 PM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Milan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 320
QuoteOriginally posted by Vindemiatrix Quote
If the 55 is sharper I am definetely not getting the 31
lol, It's a very very good lens, a bit overrated for me, but it does his job very nicely!
BTW, I think it's better for you to send this lens back, since it has clear problem! It wouldn't be like your 100 macro, but keeping a lens in this status is like throw your money!
11-29-2012, 03:01 PM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Milan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 320
PS. if you want I can make a shot for you at 1.4, but here in Italy is night, so I think that using flash would ruin the test... tell me if you want!
11-29-2012, 03:03 PM   #29
Senior Member
Vindemiatrix's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: las vegas
Posts: 209
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gabro822 Quote
lol, It's a very very good lens, a bit overrated for me, but it does his job very nicely!
BTW, I think it's better for you to send this lens back, since it has clear problem! It wouldn't be like your 100 macro, but keeping a lens in this status is like throw your money!

This is the my second copy. The first one was far worst. The aufocus wasn't right not even with af adjustment .

This one is far better but still not what I'd expect, not at big apertures at least. I recall my canon plastic fantastic sharper than this wide open and that's a lens that costs 6 times less.
11-29-2012, 03:20 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
Posts: 422
QuoteOriginally posted by Vindemiatrix Quote
Wouldn't that be because dof is increased at longer distances?.

here is a quick comparison shot. this is in bad bright sunshine 100% crops . first at 1.4 second at f8 as you can see there is no sharpeness whatsoever on the first shot,and it was on focus .

Are you using a lense hood? If not, I would make sure to use one as it should help a lot in bright situations.

On my FA 50 1.4, I use a lense hood even when indoors. It helps the "sharpness" quite a bit.

My guess is that light coming in at different angles is what is causing the unsharp look.

Basically, pretty much any lense will produce better pics if used with a hood. The only real exception would be if it is a macro lense with a very recessed front element so that the lens housing itself acts as a hood.
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!
adjustment, copy, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Da* 55 1.4 Julie Sold Items 8 06-25-2012 04:49 PM
OOF comparison (FA43, A50/1.2, K50/1.4, FA50/1.7, DA*55, FA77,FA*85) dgaies Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 99 05-15-2011 05:43 AM
First shots from the new DA* 55 1.4 jsherman999 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 29 02-22-2009 12:09 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:47 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