Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-11-2014, 05:12 PM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,807
QuoteOriginally posted by krema Quote
is this less of a problem with birds? maybe the longer distances make up for the thin DOF. i've seen some excellent bird shots with high-end lenses on the Q. maybe some of them were yours. are you getting results comparable to the more standard long lens bird shots?
It is different because the focus is key and it takes time so you can really only shoot still birds but the results can be very good.
For shooting long distancs it takes a steady hand , or in my case I need a tripod as I am not so steady.
There is an optimal aperture for most lenses on the Q that are a balance between lens sharpness and diffraction limits of the sensor.
DOF is usable at that aperture in bird telephoto.
There is a list of lenses that have been tested on the Q at this link, with samples. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/209474-adapted-lenses-tested...ce-thread.html

Good results are possible, but takes the right combo of lens and technique.
DA*300 on Q7 here, and my favorite combo for this application. DOF is pretty thick here.


11-11-2014, 05:23 PM   #17
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 38
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
It is different because the focus is key and it takes time so you can really only shoot still birds but the results can be very good.
For shooting long distancs it takes a steady hand , or in my case I need a tripod as I am not so steady.
There is an optimal aperture for most lenses on the Q that are a balance between lens sharpness and diffraction limits of the sensor.
DOF is usable at that aperture in bird telephoto.
There is a list of lenses that have been tested on the Q at this link, with samples. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/209474-adapted-lenses-tested...ce-thread.html

Good results are possible, but takes the right combo of lens and technique.
DA*300 on Q7 here, and my favorite combo for this application. DOF is pretty thick here.
now that's the kind of photo i was thinking of!

you're out past 1500mm with 300mm. have you seen the results of bird shots at 100mm through a macro? can they get feather detail like this?
11-11-2014, 06:17 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Montréal QC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,351
Krema, with all due respect, I suggest that you might be overthinking this... As most posters have said, specialized macro lenses are generally optically excellent, so no matter what you pick, it won't be a huge mistake, and if worse comes to worse, you resell one lens for at least close to what you paid for it and you try something else. I suggest that you get some practical experience under your belt to see what works for you. You're also apparently unsure of how depth-of-field issues vary depending on the type of shooting (birding vrs macro) and the settings used, so you might want to read up on that.

Personally, I think as long as you're buying a well-rated macro lens, the inherent optical quality of the particular model vrs another is not something you should be overly worried about. You can focus on other features. Longer focal length (90-200mm) is an advantage for bugs, but can make it harder to take pictures of larger flat objects (eg paintings) in tight spaces (eg artist studios). On another front, is a lens that only goes to 1:2 - like the Pentax-M 50mm F/4 macro, a very fine lens! - sufficient for your needs? (And if you don't know what "1:2" means, you need to read up on macro reproduction ratios.) Also, do you need/want a lens with a focus limiter (useful when using a macro for non-macro shots)? Or auto-focus even? What about WR? Pentax colors? Is weight a concern?

Some people pick up a macro lens, try to shoot macro, get awful results, and go on to blame the lens. But macro requires technique & patience. Even with a good lens, if you're shooting live critters handheld, it's rather difficult to get a sharp, well-focused shot with good depth-of-field at 1:1 (or above). But good sharp results can be achieved with a great variety of setups, of which bona fide macro lenses are just a subset.

However for now, if I may, I think you should just pick the spot where you want to jump into the pool, and go! Buy a lens and go shoot some macros.
11-11-2014, 06:19 PM   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,807
I haven't spent too much time with the 100 for birds, I primarily use it for macro with the Q.
There are some samples of folks using a 135 non macro pretty successfully with the Q in the index and a related thread called the Reach of the Q.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/173602-reach-q-images.html

---------- Post added 11-11-14 at 05:23 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Doundounba Quote
Krema, with all due respect, I suggest that you might be overthinking this... As most posters have said, specialized macro lenses are generally optically excellent, so no matter what you pick, it won't be a huge mistake, and if worse comes to worse, you resell one lens for at least close to what you paid for it and you try something else. I suggest that you get some practical experience under your belt to see what works for you. You're also apparently unsure of how depth-of-field issues vary depending on the type of shooting (birding vrs macro) and the settings used, so you might want to read up on that.

Personally, I think as long as you're buying a well-rated macro lens, the inherent optical quality of the particular model vrs another is not something you should be overly worried about. You can focus on other features. Longer focal length (90-200mm) is an advantage for bugs, but can make it harder to take pictures of larger flat objects (eg paintings) in tight spaces (eg artist studios). On another front, is a lens that only goes to 1:2 - like the Pentax-M 50mm F/4 macro, a very fine lens! - sufficient for your needs? (And if you don't know what "1:2" means, you need to read up on macro reproduction ratios.) Also, do you need/want a lens with a focus limiter (useful when using a macro for non-macro shots)? Or auto-focus even? What about WR? Pentax colors? Is weight a concern?

Some people pick up a macro lens, try to shoot macro, get awful results, and go on to blame the lens. But macro requires technique & patience. Even with a good lens, if you're shooting live critters handheld, it's rather difficult to get a sharp, well-focused shot with good depth-of-field at 1:1 (or above). But good sharp results can be achieved with a great variety of setups, of which bona fide macro lenses are just a subset.

However for now, if I may, I think you should just pick the spot where you want to jump into the pool, and go! Buy a lens and go shoot some macros.
Agreed . There are all sorts of setups being used successfully here Macro Photography - PentaxForums.com

11-11-2014, 07:28 PM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2014
Location: Minnesota
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,034
Why get a Sigma ? You can purchase an older Pentax 100mm macro that not only has an aperture ring it has a focus limiter. I don't think the optical formula has changed much even on the newer model.
11-11-2014, 08:07 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Montréal QC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,351
QuoteOriginally posted by hjoseph7 Quote
Why get a Sigma ? You can purchase an older Pentax 100mm macro that not only has an aperture ring it has a focus limiter. I don't think the optical formula has changed much even on the newer model.
Personally, for me, the answer to that was weight (and, to a lesser extent, price). The old F and FA 100mm macros are around 600g, vrs 400-460 for the Tamron 90mm and Sigma 105mm. So when I found a great deal, I got the Tamron 90mm. But yeah, if weight is not a priority, those are, by all accounts, fine lenses. And I'm still tempted by the mystique of the Lester Dine 105mm, which is also a heavy beast... That being said, I don't think the F/FA 50mm macros have limiters, whereas the Sigma does.
12-11-2014, 06:06 PM   #22
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 38
Original Poster
After reading and re-reading this and my other threads about macro lenses I'm reconsidering investing in them heavily until I have a better feel for them. For now I'm going to be saving for one or two special normal lenses, but would still like to try out a real macro lens to get a sense of what they're like.

To that end I'm thinking about the Tamron 90mm adaptall manual focus lens. It seems to be well received and I can't tell the photos taken with it from photos taken with the upper end of macro lenses. I already have a set of PK extension tubes which I assume could take the lens to 1:1 reproduction. Any comments?

12-12-2014, 07:42 PM   #23
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 38
Original Poster
finally

The late nights are over (for now) as I settled on the Tamron 90mm 2.8 and PK lens turbo for NEX as a used package deal. I'll drive out to pick it up next week and finally post a few photos with it and the cheap NEX.

Thanks for all your input.

K
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!
100mm, 50mm, 70mm, 90mm, aperture, copy, film, flickr, focus, k-mount, lens, lenses, macro, pentax, pentax lens, results, sensor, setups, sigma, slr lens, tamron, turbo
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Going fullframe - considerations infoomatic Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 50 08-09-2015 09:22 PM
Upgrade k3 vs k5 II? (low light considerations, features, expense) Rice Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 06-14-2014 03:40 PM
K7 video issues - considerations for a prospective buyer RobG Video Recording and Processing 2 02-11-2010 05:12 AM
Light tripod considerations juu Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 10 12-16-2009 04:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:17 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