Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-03-2008, 04:34 PM   #1
Veteran Member
FHPhotographer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,298
A little cross pollination...

Here's an interesting thread from the "other" forum: Primes not worth it? [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review. I

Here I posted the test of zoom vs. 50 f/1.4 prime (https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/36084-50-f-1-4...ele-zooms.html) but over there I posted the same kind of thing but with the zoom vs. 77 prime.

Interesting responses...
FHPhotographer

09-03-2008, 05:15 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
i noticed the thread and was thankful that most posters were civil in their responses
if you're always shooting around f8, then most lenses are pretty equal, even the kit lens
but thanks for taking the time to do the tests
09-04-2008, 01:14 AM   #3
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
Thank you for calling us pigs

QuoteOriginally posted by FHPhotographer Quote
Here's an interesting thread from the "other" forum: Primes not worth it? [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review.

Interesting responses...
FHPhotographer
So interesting

To Roentarre30 and others:

Lighten up, folks. I'm talking the value of a couple of tools, not spitting on the flag. Use whatever lens you want, and defend it's quality and utility to your heart's content.Y'all are taking this way to seriously.

In any case, this wasn't an advocacy argument; I didn't have a position going into it, just a question: was the assertion of prime lens supreriority true. So I did a little test for image quality (sharpeness, or clarity or contrast or accuracy or whatever) as I see it: not for depth of field, or bokeah or color saturation, or low light flexibility or the esthetics of build quality.

Rejecting the comparison criteria doesn't allow you to then dispute the findings. The "yeah but if you had done this, then..." comments are disingenuous. Take the images for what they are, what they show, not what they should show, or you want them to show. Y'all can't have it both ways. But within this context, I conclude that the inexpensive zoom delivered an image that seems around 90-95% of the image delivered by the very much more expensive prime lens.

By the way, even though it was stated up front, there was no post processing. Anyone who asserted that position despite the facts, you're seeing what you expect to see.

So I pose a second question ... are you looking at the two posted images and just responding to, and challenging the idea of, even making the comparison? Or are you looking at the images and coming to a different conclusion within the limitations of this test? If the latter, let's talk about it; if the former, I can't think of anything more to say except to quote the wise old farmer...never try to teach the pig to sing, it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

BHPhotographer


You are quite a gentleman.

I found this quite intellectually stimulating.
09-04-2008, 06:45 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
QuoteQuote:
Rejecting the comparison criteria doesn't allow you to then dispute the findings. The "yeah but if you had done this, then..." comments are disingenuous. Take the images for what they are, what they show, not what they should show, or you want them to show. Y'all can't have it both ways. But within this context, I conclude that the inexpensive zoom delivered an image that seems around 90-95% of the image delivered by the very much more expensive prime lens.
i don't see why you're making a big fuss. all that you've shown is at F8 for a picture of a cactus, the FA77 is (imo) not as good as the zoom. your test is in no way conclusive of the overall performance of the lens.

your testing methodology is like that of our good friend Ken Rockwell
A $150 versus a $5,000 Camera

09-04-2008, 02:39 PM   #5
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 32,742
Hi folks, I guess I'm just old school, IMHO I consider that a "jack of all trades is a master of none".

By this I mean that a prime is designed and manufactured to do one specific job, where as a zoom has to perform multiple tasks in terms focal range.

Also if lens speed is not an issue, zooms may be acceptable for your needs, for me I want fast and bright, but hey, each to their own.
09-04-2008, 05:54 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
Yeah, this is a little silly. It's like saying a Nissan Sentra performs as well as Bugatti Veyron because both are about the same cruising down the highway at 70.
09-04-2008, 09:30 PM   #7
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Yeah, this is a little silly. It's like saying a Nissan Sentra performs as well as Bugatti Veyron because both are about the same cruising down the highway at 70.

Exactly, well put.


.
09-05-2008, 04:27 AM   #8
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by kerrowdown Quote
By this I mean that a prime is designed and manufactured to do one specific job, where as a zoom has to perform multiple tasks in terms focal range.
What about the DA 35 Limited Macro?

Is it a macro lens, or is it just a versatile 35mm prime?

09-05-2008, 05:39 AM   #9
Forum Member
LittleSkink's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sheffield, England
Posts: 63
yeah, good point about the 35mm, got it as my multi purpose lense rather than use the kit

my CV Nokton also has at least 2 purposes (for me) f1.7 to f2.4 its the most amazing portrait lens, smaller than that it becomes an ubersharp 85mm on APS-C. A third purpose if you include posing with it

so is this about posers vs pixel peepers ?

Last edited by LittleSkink; 09-05-2008 at 05:40 AM. Reason: typos
09-05-2008, 07:42 AM   #10
Veteran Member
gkopeliadis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ATHENS, GREECE
Posts: 311
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Yeah, this is a little silly. It's like saying a Nissan Sentra performs as well as Bugatti Veyron because both are about the same cruising down the highway at 70.
What's the difference for the drivers in this scene? Fuel consumption or the stereo?
09-05-2008, 11:55 AM   #11
Veteran Member
FHPhotographer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,298
Original Poster
And now car analogies ? Enough's enough...

QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Yeah, this is a little silly. It's like saying a Nissan Sentra performs as well as Bugatti Veyron because both are about the same cruising down the highway at 70.
A frank exchange of views is now "silly," huh? Well, since you won't stay within the parameters of my modest test to level your criticism, let me move out into your ambiguous world of analogy and ask you something: have you driven the Veyron? Or the Sentra? Both on the same highway under the same conditions? If not, then how can an objective (if limited) comparison of images be "silly" and your analogy-based criticism be valid?

You're rejecting the test results/conclusion by analogy, drawing a parallel to a 77mm lens that can do other things (as can the Vyron) that the 24-90 (or the Sentra) can't do? Very true, but I didn't test those "other" things. Maybe I shoulda, maybe I coulda, and maybe I'm just an ignorant photography roundheel out to smear the good name of Pentax... or maybe I'm just an ameteur trying to learn by doing and I asked a question that a lot of folks didn't like.

And at this point I'm going to stop responding to these posts, my flippers are getting tired swimming upstream.
FHP
09-05-2008, 12:48 PM   #12
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
What about the DA 35 Limited Macro?

Is it a macro lens, or is it just a versatile 35mm prime?
I personally consider any macro lens a dual-purpose lens - they can be general telephotos (200, 180,) portait/street (105, 100, 90, 70) or D-normal portrait/walkabouts (50, 35).

Some are better at the dual-role than others - like the Viv 105 and DA 35.


.
09-05-2008, 12:57 PM   #13
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
I think the whole point of the Sentra/Bugatti comparison was to show that thing1, which is generally or universally thought to be 'better' than thing2, is not better all the time under every circumstance or in every environment, and it's possible to put thing1 and thing2 into a narrow band of parameters in which they seem to perform equally.

You know, like Barak Obama and Sarah Palin. (take that however you will!)


.

Last edited by jsherman999; 09-05-2008 at 01:03 PM.
09-05-2008, 09:19 PM   #14
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
QuoteOriginally posted by FHPhotographer Quote
A frank exchange of views is now "silly," huh? Well, since you won't stay within the parameters of my modest test to level your criticism, let me move out into your ambiguous world of analogy and ask you something: have you driven the Veyron? Or the Sentra? Both on the same highway under the same conditions? If not, then how can an objective (if limited) comparison of images be "silly" and your analogy-based criticism be valid?
Your view is appreciated but you drew premature conclusion based on your limited finding with a setting that is hard to show the features of a prime vs a zoom.

Again, you are a professional in your own way but being so defensive does not help an intelligent discussion.

QuoteOriginally posted by FHPhotographer Quote
You're rejecting the test results/conclusion by analogy, drawing a parallel to a 77mm lens that can do other things (as can the Vyron) that the 24-90 (or the Sentra) can't do? Very true, but I didn't test those "other" things. Maybe I shoulda, maybe I coulda, and maybe I'm just an ignorant photography roundheel out to smear the good name of Pentax... or maybe I'm just an ameteur trying to learn by doing and I asked a question that a lot of folks didn't like.
Look, many people in the forum would know that quite a few of us dislike Fa 77 ltd in many ways. In the end, it comes down to individual preference. You do not need to tell us how much you dislike the lens itself and you shall not draw a conclusion based on the crude comparison you are showing. Not everyone who buy so many lenses are certainly gear heads or fanboys. Sometimes we like to try out every lens avaiable for our picture making!

Fa 77 ltd is certainly not the sharpest lens in pentax lens line-up or when it is compared to primes of its leagues across competition. It is definitely sharper in the corner. The microcontrast is great revealing a pop effect. The bokeh are pleasant most of the time except bokeh CA which is rather annoying. All these had been debated and discussed in lengths to the point of exhaustion.

If you want to draw a conclusion based on your only test with pictures taken at f8, it is sometimes nice for people to point that out (most of people just look at it and realise that you are showing a misguided experiment).

QuoteOriginally posted by FHPhotographer Quote
And at this point I'm going to stop responding to these posts, my flippers are getting tired swimming upstream.
FHP
I am still a newbie and open to criticism, hoping people to point out my mistakes in anyway. If your aim is show the rest of the forum this amazing fact that these two lenses produce the same image quality at f8, you should realise that we do not find this finding a new discovery. If you just want to be appreciated that primes are just pointless in general (you have been told to get these limiteds), points taken and move on with your zoom.

It took me 4 years to save up for a prime when I was a student. The joy of a prime was soooo overwhelming since I only had a lens 28-70 f4.5-5.6 for 4 years. I know how limiting that zoom was back then. That 4 years was well worth it!
09-08-2008, 09:17 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,845
QuoteOriginally posted by roentarre Quote
Your view is appreciated but you drew premature conclusion based on your limited finding with a setting that is hard to show the features of a prime vs a zoom.

Again, you are a professional in your own way but being so defensive does not help an intelligent discussion.



Look, many people in the forum would know that quite a few of us dislike Fa 77 ltd in many ways. In the end, it comes down to individual preference. You do not need to tell us how much you dislike the lens itself and you shall not draw a conclusion based on the crude comparison you are showing. Not everyone who buy so many lenses are certainly gear heads or fanboys. Sometimes we like to try out every lens avaiable for our picture making!

Fa 77 ltd is certainly not the sharpest lens in pentax lens line-up or when it is compared to primes of its leagues across competition. It is definitely sharper in the corner. The microcontrast is great revealing a pop effect. The bokeh are pleasant most of the time except bokeh CA which is rather annoying. All these had been debated and discussed in lengths to the point of exhaustion.

If you want to draw a conclusion based on your only test with pictures taken at f8, it is sometimes nice for people to point that out (most of people just look at it and realise that you are showing a misguided experiment).



I am still a newbie and open to criticism, hoping people to point out my mistakes in anyway. If your aim is show the rest of the forum this amazing fact that these two lenses produce the same image quality at f8, you should realise that we do not find this finding a new discovery. If you just want to be appreciated that primes are just pointless in general (you have been told to get these limiteds), points taken and move on with your zoom.

It took me 4 years to save up for a prime when I was a student. The joy of a prime was soooo overwhelming since I only had a lens 28-70 f4.5-5.6 for 4 years. I know how limiting that zoom was back then. That 4 years was well worth it!
A very good response. I got by with a consumer zoom for 8 years on my film SLR, when I finally got a fast 50, I was shocked at the quality difference. And people were commenting how the colours and redering was really great, though I hadn't told them that I was taking with a new lens.

Many times I was hitting the wall, with the limitations of the zoom; not knowing that there was a solution in having various tools for different jobs.

Good to hear that you one day also just had few lenses . Maybe one day I can have my dream arsenal too.
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!
forum, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is Cross Processing for in k-x? hockmasm Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 05-02-2010 03:50 AM
Cross d.bradley Monthly Photo Contests 0 02-16-2010 09:20 PM
cross championship juanraortiz Post Your Photos! 0 01-11-2009 12:07 PM
Cyclo-cross 2 juanraortiz Post Your Photos! 2 12-27-2008 03:40 PM
Photographer and the cross aabram Post Your Photos! 3 02-13-2007 02:27 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:51 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