Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-09-2015, 05:43 PM   #61
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,381
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
I see that anyway flare resistance, color rendering, bokeh quality or contrast/micro contrast is a non factor.
The trouble lies in how you reproducibly quantify such things. If they can be quantified all the better, but it seems to me that bokeh is hopeless in this regard - it's a aesthetic quality, after all, and what is pleasing to some may be displeasing (or insufficiently pleasing) to others.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
So if I understand right if I need to compare tamron 90 to DA50-135 I will check the performance at f/2.8, f/4 and so own + the distorsion but the macro feature would not count.
If you want true macro capability, buy a true macro lens is my call. People who don't want macro capability do not NEED to buy a macro prime, and their otherwise excellent prime doesn't need to be judged as wanting if pitched against a zoom that has this feature. If your zoom lens has macro capability, that needs to be judged against a dedicated macro prime that falls within its focal length range.

08-09-2015, 05:56 PM   #62
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
The one thing that will never make a zoom a stack of primes is the inability to remove something from the stack. As someone mentioned earlier, some of us use the primes for the performance and also for the size and weight.
08-09-2015, 09:04 PM   #63
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,381
Original Poster
And in that case it's your call as to how much smallness and lightness you are willing to sacrifice for the zoom's flexibility. For some, the answer is "none"; for others it's quite a bit!
08-09-2015, 10:11 PM - 1 Like   #64
Veteran Member
noelpolar's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Goolwa, SA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,310
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I like to shoot narrow to wide DoFs and pick the best. Sometimes the results surprise me, and I'd hate to miss out on those surprises.
I'm almost guaranteed that the most well planned and executed shot of the day isn't the wow one! (assuming I jag a wow one!)

08-09-2015, 11:28 PM   #65
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
And honestly some people don't buy them for that reason. Maybe you haven't kept up, but a take many imaged with my 70 2.8 at all different DoFs and I find it's rare the wide open image is the best with ƒ5.6 snd ƒ8 the two most common apertures. You may like to shoot narrow DoF. I like to shoot narrow to wide DoFs and pick the best. Sometimes the results surprise me, and I'd hate to miss out on those surprises.

Listen dude, set up whatever test you want a run it. I do what I do as a public service to try and understand what I see looking in actual pictures. I don't care how it should be done etc. because, it's my time and this is the way I do it. If you want it done some other way, do it. There's nothing stopping you. Maybe I should do an Imaging Resources or Phtozone and start asking for donations to cover my time.



The way I do it, looking at lots of pictures taken with similar equipment at similar times, I evaluate all those things.
If that for the other thread you've posted I would have been thiniking you have the 70 macro for it's macro capabilities. Maybe wrong, after all I don't care much of macro capabilities of the DA35 f/2.8 I have... But I have no issue with you not carring of large apperture even through I know you are thinking of a DA*200 for this very reason !

I may care a bit of large apperture and performance at large apperture, sure and that why I got an FA77 instead of a DA70 and that even the 17-70, 50-135 and FA50 I got before weren't really satisfying. Either the performance was not that good at large apperture, or the apperture was too narrow. But I have also DA21 or DA15... Surelly that's not for apperture, otherwise I would have a 16-50 !

As you know and shown us, the sharpness closed down if often not so different because all (decent ?) lenses are sharp closed down anyway (your test show it on the other thread). At least on center. Also if we don't spend our time looking at picture with magnifying glass, that not key... Except to print huge or crop (last thing I'am fan of as you may know and that I'am sure you do too, as a birder shooter !).

That for other reasons than apperture and macro I have a DA15 or DA21. That's indeed for the size, flare resistance, color rendering, constrast/micro constrast. Many thing indeed that few reviews report (well they do a bit for flare and size is not difficult to obtain)... Many things that a MTF chart say nothing about. Where CA or coma tests say nothing.

Even worse characteristics that don't show in every photos !

But if what you did in the other post show something is that while they are all sharp, their color rendering can be dramatically different. The bokeh is different too. I would have been thinking such dramatic difference would have been the lighting that changed quite a bit, but you said it was not...
08-10-2015, 02:34 PM   #66
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
And in that case it's your call as to how much smallness and lightness you are willing to sacrifice for the zoom's flexibility. For some, the answer is "none"; for others it's quite a bit!
That is true, but it is a reason why the "stack of primes" is not a great description of any zoom. They are two different animals.
08-10-2015, 03:25 PM   #67
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
That is true, but it is a reason why the "stack of primes" is not a great description of any zoom. They are two different animals.
You haven't seem my Sigma 70 macro. Beautiful lens I love the images, but as big to carry as my 18-135.

08-10-2015, 04:01 PM   #68
Veteran Member
noelpolar's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Goolwa, SA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,310
I've always taken the passing statement of "a stack of primes" to be a qualitive assesment that the lens is pretty good through out it's range and would deliver images that get the job done for most peoples needs. Nothing more.

Clearly prime lenses have other attributes (for the most part)..... both positives, and at time negetives.
08-11-2015, 08:54 AM   #69
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,155
QuoteOriginally posted by noelpolar Quote
I've always taken the passing statement of "a stack of primes" to be a qualitive assesment that the lens is pretty good through out it's range and would deliver images that get the job done for most peoples needs. Nothing more.
That pretty much hits the nail on the head. The phrase is just an expression. It isn't normally used to suggest that a zoom lens can ever precisely duplicate, in all respects, a prime lens. For years, the Pentax lens most often described as a "stack of primes" was the old A 35-105/3.5. While that lens renders very well for a zoom lens and enjoys fairly consistent performance throughout it's range, it's not as sharp or as contrasty as the primes I have in its range.

Nowadays, the best zooms are so good that the differences between zooms and primes are often quite subtle. In good light, there's very little difference between my DA 16-85 and my DA 21. They both produce sharp, contrasty images with excellent color. But the DA 21 features better flare control, better overall rendering, slightly more pleasing color rendering.
08-11-2015, 10:33 AM   #70
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
mattb123's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Colorado High Country
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,867
I have to say the 60-250 has a rendering that looks the most like a prime lens of any zoom I have used. I think it is the micro contrast or perhaps pixie dust but the images have a certain quality that my other zooms seem to lack but my DA Limited primes also have. I haven't done any specific tests because there are usually reasons other than ultimate IQ that lead me to pick one over the other for a certain job.
If I'm taking a zoom on a shoot I need to react quickly to changing conditions and/or I need WR. In fact having WR and not having to change lenses in an environment that WR is designed for is probably my #1 reason to bring a zoom.
If I can shoot slowly and conditions aren't harsh, I'll usually opt for smaller primes for easier carrying and great IQ. Even the A* 300/4 is pretty compact compared to the 60-250.

But I have never called a zoom a stack of primes either. Or a prime a slice of a zoom...
08-11-2015, 10:35 AM   #71
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You haven't seem my Sigma 70 macro. Beautiful lens I love the images, but as big to carry as my 18-135.
I haven't seen the Sigma, but the 18-135 is one of the more compact zooms around, but probably not one that gets called a "stack of primes" on other terms too often. The ones that are called a stack of primes for performance reasons usually aren't so small.
08-11-2015, 12:19 PM   #72
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,381
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
The ones that are called a stack of primes for performance reasons usually aren't so small.
Because, to be humorous, they need to take all the glass from all those primes and shove them inside the zoom casing...
08-11-2015, 12:59 PM   #73
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
I haven't seen the Sigma, but the 18-135 is one of the more compact zooms around, but probably not one that gets called a "stack of primes" on other terms too often. The ones that are called a stack of primes for performance reasons usually aren't so small.
There always the 20-40 some consider to be stack of DA ltd Quite reasonnably small... But yes that would the only one I have heard some speaking as a stack of prime that is reasonably small.
08-11-2015, 01:34 PM   #74
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Upstate New York, US
Photos: Albums
Posts: 225
Well, I think it's hard to quantify the phrase "stack of primes," since it seems to be an impression that someone gets rather than anything technical about the lenses. One thing I would say is that it implies the lens is very sharp and has no weak focal lengths, i.e., it's not significantly softer toward one end like many zooms seem to be.
08-11-2015, 02:30 PM   #75
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Because, to be humorous, they need to take all the glass from all those primes and shove them inside the zoom casing...
True , but a number of the better zooms seem to be even bigger than if they took the glass from a selection of DA Ltd primes and shoved them inside.

---------- Post added 08-11-15 at 03:34 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
There always the 20-40 some consider to be stack of DA ltd Quite reasonnably small... But yes that would the only one I have heard some speaking as a stack of prime that is reasonably small.
Not nearly as small as a DA21 and a DA40 together, especially if they only had one mount.
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!
aperture, da, day, e.g, f/3.5, fl, glass, iq, k-mount, lens, lenses, ltd, normhead, pentax lens, people, primes, slr lens, stack
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC-A 35-105 f/3.5 "Stack of Primes" Zoom Lens Fat Albert Sold Items 7 04-15-2014 06:21 PM
Good hood for A 35-105 "Stack of Primes"? Fat Albert Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 10 02-06-2014 08:22 AM
For Sale - Sold: "Stack o' Primes" Pentax-A 35-105mm f3.5 Macro (WORLDWIDE) cheekygeek Sold Items 3 10-27-2013 12:24 PM
For Sale - Sold: "Stack o' Primes" Pentax-A 35-105mm f3.5 Macro (WORLDWIDE) cheekygeek Sold Items 5 08-09-2013 01:41 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:35 AM. | 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