[Matchete]

Hi fellow Pentaxians,

The well respected Lloyd Chambers has reviewed the following lenses on the K-1 : DA 35 f/2.8 Macro, DFA 50 f/2.8 Macro and DFA 100mm f/2.8 Macro.

diglloyd - Blog

Speaking about his usual test scene, he says that when using Pixel Shift "The Pentax K1 blows away anything I’ve seen on this subject before" .

Mat

[Heie]

The thing I am most blown away by is being part of the art-world, specifically photography and other graphic art, and yet his COMPLETE inability to see that his blog is arguably the LEAST user-friendly thing ever conceived.

I consider myself pretty tech-savvy and find most things "graphic," whether they be web design, photography, etc., to be pretty intuitive, however I literally cannot figure out how to properly read and navigate that horrendous excuse for professional web-based content.

I am constantly stuck between trying to figure out where the follow-on content is - is it just one massive scroll page? If I click on an article, I don't see anything other content, but that's weird because he didn't write an actual article/post... Maybe it's buried beneath all those ads (that take up the entire width of the content frame?!).

Wholly unimpressed.

-Heie

[jeffshaddix]

The thing I am most blown away by is being part of the art-world, specifically photography and other graphic art, and yet his COMPLETE inability to see that his blog is arguably the LEAST user-friendly thing ever conceived.

I consider myself pretty tech-savvy and find most things "graphic," whether they be web design, photography, etc., to be pretty intuitive, however I literally cannot figure out how to properly read and navigate that horrendous excuse for professional web-based content.

I am constantly stuck between trying to figure out where the follow-on content is - is it just one massive scroll page? If I click on an article, I don't see anything other content, but that's weird because he didn't write an actual article/post... Maybe it's buried beneath all those ads (that take up the entire width of the content frame?!).

Wholly unimpressed.

-Heie

Haha totally agree, I went to the site, and after being bombarded with ads and odd format, I closed the window and was going to post something similar to you, but certainly less eloquent.

[monochrome]

AdBlock+

[pepperberry farm]

The thing I am most blown away by is being part of the art-world, specifically photography and other graphic art, and yet his COMPLETE inability to see that his blog is arguably the LEAST user-friendly thing ever conceived.

I consider myself pretty tech-savvy and find most things "graphic," whether they be web design, photography, etc., to be pretty intuitive, however I literally cannot figure out how to properly read and navigate that horrendous excuse for professional web-based content.

I am constantly stuck between trying to figure out where the follow-on content is - is it just one massive scroll page? If I click on an article, I don't see anything other content, but that's weird because he didn't write an actual article/post... Maybe it's buried beneath all those ads (that take up the entire width of the content frame?!).

Wholly unimpressed.

-Heie

this...

I was stupefied at the lack of integrity in that website's design; it's a mess.... it took far too long to actually find his specific ramblings on the K1 and how bad the FA 31 is...

[bxf]

I can't be bothered to navigate through too many incomprehensible links. However, clicking on some links yields a line that says "Article continues... for subscribers". Perhaps this is why one cannot find what one expects.

[ghufran_ali]

Can someone plz sum up his conclusions. He seens to be very well regarded as a reviewer. And i find it fascinating that he s covering the K1 and many Pentax lenses with quite enthusiasm. And his review method seems to be different than usual reviews. Unfortunately I'm not a subscriber, but i would really like to know his thoughts specifically abt Pentax DA 20-40 and FA 31 limited.

[pepperberry farm]

Can someone plz sum up his conclusions. He seens to be very well regarded as a reviewer. And i find it fascinating that he s covering the K1 and many Pentax lenses with quite enthusiasm. And his review method seems to be different than usual reviews. Unfortunately I'm not a subscriber, but i would really like to know his thoughts specifically abt Pentax DA 20-40 and FA 31 limited.

very briefly:

DIGLOYD: yes, the Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM Art is available in Pentax K mount at about $899, and it is a very fine lens, much better corrected than the Pentax prime lenses in that range. And so, a must-have lens for the K1. Optically, the about $1000 Pentax smcP FA 31mm f/1.8 Limited is not in the same league as the Sigma 35/1.4, a fact driven home trying to focus the two in magnified Live View: the Sigma is relatively crisp at f/1.4, the Pentax 31/1.8 a hazy affair, the Pentax apparently being a classic feel-nice lens, not a performer in any technical sense. The Pentax 31/1.8 is beautifully built, but it certainly is Limited (in performance and value).

[MikeW]

this...

I was stupefied at the lack of integrity in that website's design; it's a mess.... it took far too long to actually find his specific ramblings on the K1 and how bad the FA 31 is...

I agree! What a mess!! I gave up on it.

[pkokity]

The DA 35 is here: diglloyd: Pentax DA HD Limited 35mm f/2.8 Macro Aperture Series: Mosaic (Pentax K1 SuperRes)
The DFA 50 is here: diglloyd: Pentax 50mm f/2.8 Macro Aperture Series: Tiled Water Fountain (Pentax K1 SuperRes)
The FA 100 is in the OP link and this: diglloyd DAP - Pentax smc Pentax-D FA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro - Aperture Series: Tiled Water Fountain (Pentax K1 SuperRes) (diglloyd.com excerpt)

These really aren't much of a review. They are just to illustrate how beautifully these work with the pixel shift technology and how he likes to use this tile/mosaic wall to challenge the 3D rendering capabilities of a camera/lens.

Here is his blog index: diglloyd - Blog Index

[Fenwoodian]

The thing I am most blown away by is being part of the art-world, specifically photography and other graphic art, and yet his COMPLETE inability to see that his blog is arguably the LEAST user-friendly thing ever conceived.

I consider myself pretty tech-savvy and find most things "graphic," whether they be web design, photography, etc., to be pretty intuitive, however I literally cannot figure out how to properly read and navigate that horrendous excuse for professional web-based content.

I am constantly stuck between trying to figure out where the follow-on content is - is it just one massive scroll page? If I click on an article, I don't see anything other content, but that's weird because he didn't write an actual article/post... Maybe it's buried beneath all those ads (that take up the entire width of the content frame?!).

Wholly unimpressed.

-Heie

I subscribed to Lloyd Chambers website for many years. In fact, I even loaned him one of my lenses for testing.

He makes his living from this website (I also make my living from my websites). For Lloyd to economically survive he needs to generate revenue from either sales or advertising. The advertizing is meant to monetize those visitors like you guys who are there just for the free information. The subscriptions to his in-depth reviews are intended to provide a huge amount of detailed and well-organized information on the camera equipment that he tests. If you subscribe, you will find that his articles are well-organized, easy to find, and quite thorough.

He is not a fanboy of any one brand, he reports what he discovers during his testing. If you are a Pentax fanboy you often will not like what he has to say, as he will report exactly what his findings are - even if they condemn your favorite Pentax lens (e.g. the Pentax 31mm Limited is mushy at large apertures on the K1).

I don't blame him for not giving away everything for free - he (like us) needs to make a living and support a family.

Quality information often comes at a price. Folks who primarily limit their information to free webpages and Google search are missing out on some of the best (and deepest information) on the Internet (which is usually not free). But that's another topic entirely...

[MadMathMind]

DIGLOYD: yes, the Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM Art is available in Pentax K mount at about $899, and it is a very fine lens, much better corrected than the Pentax prime lenses in that range. And so, a must-have lens for the K1. Optically, the about $1000 Pentax smcP FA 31mm f/1.8 Limited is not in the same league as the Sigma 35/1.4, a fact driven home trying to focus the two in magnified Live View: the Sigma is relatively crisp at f/1.4, the Pentax 31/1.8 a hazy affair, the Pentax apparently being a classic feel-nice lens, not a performer in any technical sense. The Pentax 31/1.8 is beautifully built, but it certainly is Limited (in performance and value).

I'm starting to question the value of professional reviews. They do tell things like "they are" but "like they are" tends to focus on really small details and performance and trying to get 40MP of image out of a 36MP camera. So much emphasis on resolution...so much emphasis on resolution and MTF charts. Most of the discussions you see around the web break down to pixel counting. And what happens at maximum aperture because so many people subscribe to the "It's a 1.8 lens so it should be shot there or it's a waste. And all portraiture must be done below f/2.8." I guess that is what 'the people' want to read?

I'd really like to think professional photographers are above MP counting and pixel peeping arguments but I guess not because if they weren't, these articles wouldn't be written. Or is that the point? They're not written for them and instead written for the guy who shoots with a 5D Mark III simply because it costs more and is therefore must be necessary. I learned Canon made a 50mm f/1.0 lens for $6000k+...but why? I can't imagine anything anyone would need this for....or heck, even want it. But I'm sidetracking.

Let me start over. Who are reviews written for these days? The stuff that's in them can't be for professionals; anyone who needs all that resolution should be shooting MF. So instead, we have products designed for....people with too much money on their hands? People who are not succeeding in the 'business' and think better lenses and more pixels will get them there? That could just be the forum audience. That would make sense. Certain reviewers become popular because they focus on a certain quality of the product that the people who are likely to read these reviews care about.

It's not the say that the bloggers have driven the megapixels war. Somewhere, people wanted this as the screen sizes increased because viewing an image at 30% makes it look better than at 75% and that can greatly hide your lack of skill. I find it interesting that there's still so much emphasis on MP at all, as the hype over the 5DR/s shows us. Aside from the few magazines and other print media, 'normal people' just want to put their pictures on Instagram and Facebook. Heck, over 50% of my Flickr viewership comes from phones. Resolution is becoming less important because the screens are shrinking. The pixel counts on them are going up but at some point, they're too small to see the difference. Once you get 10 good MP, that probably does it for the way most people consume images.

[Fenwoodian]

I'm starting to question the value of professional reviews. They do tell things like "they are" but "like they are" tends to focus on really small details and performance and trying to get 40MP of image out of a 36MP camera. So much emphasis on resolution...so much emphasis on resolution and MTF charts. Most of the discussions you see around the web break down to pixel counting. And what happens at maximum aperture because so many people subscribe to the "It's a 1.8 lens so it should be shot there or it's a waste. And all portraiture must be done below f/2.8." I guess that is what 'the people' want to read?

I'd really like to think professional photographers are above MP counting and pixel peeping arguments but I guess not because if they weren't, these articles wouldn't be written. Or is that the point? They're not written for them and instead written for the guy who shoots with a 5D Mark III simply because it costs more and is therefore must be necessary. I learned Canon made a 50mm f/1.0 lens for $6000k+...but why? I can't imagine anything anyone would need this for....or heck, even want it. But I'm sidetracking.

Let me start over. Who are reviews written for these days? The stuff that's in them can't be for professionals; anyone who needs all that resolution should be shooting MF. So instead, we have products designed for....people with too much money on their hands? People who are not succeeding in the 'business' and think better lenses and more pixels will get them there? That could just be the forum audience. That would make sense. Certain reviewers become popular because they focus on a certain quality of the product that the people who are likely to read these reviews care about.

It's not the say that the bloggers have driven the megapixels war. Somewhere, people wanted this as the screen sizes increased because viewing an image at 30% makes it look better than at 75% and that can greatly hide your lack of skill. I find it interesting that there's still so much emphasis on MP at all, as the hype over the 5DR/s shows us. Aside from the few magazines and other print media, 'normal people' just want to put their pictures on Instagram and Facebook. Heck, over 50% of my Flickr viewership comes from phones. Resolution is becoming less important because the screens are shrinking. The pixel counts on them are going up but at some point, they're too small to see the difference. Once you get 10 good MP, that probably does it for the way most people consume images.

Well said, I agree!

Sometimes I photographic landscapes. I do so in order to make my own large prints (up to 24 inches by 36 inches) which I sell. The best selling large landscape prints in my area are those with extreme sharpness and detail. So, for my landscape photos, I need very high resolution. That's why I purchased a Pentax K1 and will exclusively shoot it in the pixel shift mode.

Other times I shoot snapshots or informal family portraits. For those times, I use smallish APS-C cameras (usually a Fuji X) and I'm not all that concerned about resolution and ultimate sharpness.

If I'm just shooting for the web, I'll likely just use my iPad's camera.

Different strokes for different folks...

[J-L SALVIGNOL]

I am a faithful subscriber to some of Lloyd sites and I think his work is both rigorous and enough standardized to allow some generalizations to make comparisons between brands, area that is often very tricky.

Lloyd is totaly positive about the PS K1 (and K3II).

As for lenses, he highlights that all potential users need to know:

1 / The impact of compactness for the DA Limited, WA notably
2 / The weight of years for the Limited, the 31 indeed.

But if his remarks - sometimes a little too absolute, OK - are weighted by the price, he noted that the performance of Pentax lenses are very good or excellent at medium apertures, lower for the larger apertures.

The 15-30 is absolutely excellent for him, with many examples in support of this very positive report.

I simply add that most of the comments that I've read here are - to put it politely - super light and unrelated to the quality of Lloyd's work.

[UncleVanya]

Let me start over. Who are reviews written for these days? The stuff that's in them can't be for professionals; anyone who needs all that resolution should be shooting MF. So instead, we have products designed for....people with too much money on their hands? People who are not succeeding in the 'business' and think better lenses and more pixels will get them there? That could just be the forum audience. That would make sense. Certain reviewers become popular because they focus on a certain quality of the product that the people who are likely to read these reviews care about.

I find this line interesting:

I would rate the K1 as superior to the Leica S, and probably most all other medium format cameras. It is a major bummer that Zeiss is not likely to support the Pentax K mount, but Leitax.com will have a conversion option soon (Nikon to Pentax K). At the least, the K1 is a must-have camera for the still-life shooter.

Perhaps we need a 645z with pixel shift next...