Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-15-2008, 04:01 AM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England
Posts: 309
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacEastgate Quote
In terms of good "glass" vs bad "glass", i use a pentax-m 50mm 1.4 almost all the time, and the results couldnt be better.
Now here you prove your point. I have that lens and it is not my favourite. I just cannot get a good picture out of it. It is not the lens, it is me, I have to learn how to use it and get the best out of it. The best pictures I have taken (and hence my favourite lenses) are with my CZJ 35/2.4, CZJ 135/3.5 and A70-210/4. (Note: all of them manual focus, and two of them stop down metering.)

QuoteQuote:
Yes it lacks hugely on the wide end, but someones put a magic spell on it or something. Everything just looks amazing.
Hmm, now tell me, how do you (and it is you) put that spell on it? I think that perhaps I am putting too much emphasis on it being f/1.4.

Richard

09-15-2008, 04:08 AM   #32
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England
Posts: 309
QuoteQuote:
There's something about the angles of incidence and the micro lens array on the sensor. Different sensors may help lock a particular lens in.
Nesster, that's a good point.

Richard
09-15-2008, 04:43 AM   #33
Veteran Member
Jimfear's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 576
QuoteOriginally posted by frank Quote
This is what I'd call a bad lens:





Oh the irony...
09-15-2008, 06:20 AM   #34
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
frank, looking at the 2 images, I think that's more a case of a bad owner...

Of course there are bad lenses that are no better than lemons. I've had lenses that were soft, had poor resolution and poor contrast, not to mention pretty bad optical aberrations. But hey, any lens is better than no lens.

09-15-2008, 08:29 AM   #35
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by regken Quote
That's right, your Panasonic would be the same at 8 X 10. ...

...
As far as lenses are concerned you have proven with some of your own photos taken with the lowly m series and old Tak lenses that modern technology does not add anything to quality. ...


Regards,

Ken, I'm probably missing your point, because it sounds like you're saying:

1) The sensor doesn't matter - the same lens will provide indistinguishable images
up to 8x10 on any sensor out there, P&S CCD sensors included.

2) The concept of a lens 'out-resolving a sensor' is a myth.


Tell me this isn't what you're saying


.
09-15-2008, 10:16 AM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: London
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 418
QuoteOriginally posted by richard64 Quote
Now here you prove your point. I have that lens and it is not my favourite. I just cannot get a good picture out of it. It is not the lens, it is me, I have to learn how to use it and get the best out of it. The best pictures I have taken (and hence my favourite lenses) are with my CZJ 35/2.4, CZJ 135/3.5 and A70-210/4. (Note: all of them manual focus, and two of them stop down metering.)



Hmm, now tell me, how do you (and it is you) put that spell on it? I think that perhaps I am putting too much emphasis on it being f/1.4.

Richard
I think there is a learning curve, especially if you are using manual focus, and with such a limited field of view there are definitely limitations. I find when im using it that you have to look for the small things, way things come together and the way light touches things. And bokeh!

I new it was a huge mistake bringing my opinion to a camera forum, even if pentax users seem to have a much greater appreciation of old lenses. But many of you seem to be on the verge of pixel-peepers.

I just feel that the image is about overall composition and mood. What you feel when you look at it, not what you see when you zoom in too far. Barrel distortion hardly effects the end image does it?

Neither does vignetting in most situations.

I've never understood the whole "oh, go and take a picture of a black and white grid, that will help". Because it is nothing like real world shooting. Half the time a bit of vignetting really looks quite nice!
09-15-2008, 11:16 AM   #37
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 506
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacEastgate Quote

I new it was a huge mistake bringing my opinion to a camera forum, even if pentax users seem to have a much greater appreciation of old lenses.

I for one don't have a problem with opinions as the most sensible answer is usually found somewhere between two opposing opinions. What I do have a problem with are "judgemental" comments (ie "wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong"..."most of you are just to ignorant to accept that"..."If you are a real man").
Having said that, I think we pretty much have the same opinion regardless...
09-15-2008, 12:26 PM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: London
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 418
QuoteOriginally posted by beaumont Quote
I for one don't have a problem with opinions as the most sensible answer is usually found somewhere between two opposing opinions. What I do have a problem with are "judgemental" comments (ie "wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong"..."most of you are just to ignorant to accept that"..."If you are a real man").
Having said that, I think we pretty much have the same opinion regardless...
True, i kind of shot myself in the foot there...

the problem is not many things in this world annoy me, but photographers being picky over their equipment (without much reason) really bugs me.

One of the things that attracted me to pentax was that there was much less pixel peepers. I find on nikon forums there are more people with too much money (and a thing for gadgets) than people who can actually take a picture. But there i go being "judgemental" again.

09-15-2008, 01:38 PM   #39
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacEastgate Quote

I just feel that the image is about overall composition and mood. What you feel when you look at it, not what you see when you zoom in too far. Barrel distortion hardly effects the end image does it?

Neither does vignetting in most situations.
Hear, hear.

I for one hardly even notice barrel distortion or vignetting - they just don't matter to me for whatever reason. Even CA/PF doesn't really matter that much - I don't even read the barrel distortion or vignetting sections of photozone's lens tests, just skip right to MTF, even though I've noticed that the measured MTF doesn't always correspond to my perceived sharpness of a lens.

I also kinda like weird, not-so-creamy bokeh sometimes. I guess I'm way out of the norm here, so don't take my advice on lens quality!


.
09-15-2008, 03:07 PM   #40
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
I for one hardly even notice barrel distortion or vignetting - they just don't matter to me for whatever reason. Even CA/PF doesn't really matter that much
I tend to agree. I notice sharpness first. I some cases, I notice color, but only if it consistently ends up being something I can't fix via adjust WB in PP. I notice contrast too, but that tends to be easier to actually *fix* (rather than "mask") via PP.

However, I will say, despite all the accolades the DA21 gets, I really was struck by the barrel distortion on the architectural shots I took with the one I borrowed for a little while a few weeks ago. It was noticeable when I lined up my shots from the day in focal length order, and it was *obvious* just from a page of thumbnails where the break between the DA21 and M28/2.8 was. I never notice that when doing a similar thing using the just the 18-55.
09-15-2008, 03:34 PM   #41
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,284
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Hear, hear.

I for one hardly even notice barrel distortion or vignetting - they just don't matter to me for whatever reason. Even CA/PF doesn't really matter that much - I don't even read the barrel distortion or vignetting sections of photozone's lens tests, just skip right to MTF, even though I've noticed that the measured MTF doesn't always correspond to my perceived sharpness of a lens.

I also kinda like weird, not-so-creamy bokeh sometimes. I guess I'm way out of the norm here, so don't take my advice on lens quality!


.
I agree regarding the distortion unless, of course there are straight lines in the subject (e.g. architecture).

In regards to vignette...I tend to feel the same way except for landscape work. There is simply something wrong about an expanse of sky/sea/desert that is dark in the corners. (Unless, of course, you are aiming for that effect for perspective purposes.)

In regards to CA...over all sharpness is degraded when CA is present. However, as often noted, CA is fairly easy to correct in PP.

In regards to PF...I guess I am not much for electric blue/purple tree limbs or chrome unless I intended that effect. Again, a little at the corners (like my Zenitar 16) is not too objectionable and likely would not be noticed by the viewer unless the image was printed to mural size! On an inexpensive lens, I am pretty indulgent regarding PF. If the price were over $300, I would be disappointed with my purchase.

Steve
09-15-2008, 03:38 PM   #42
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,675
857 views and 41 well thought-out replies .... and the OP hasn't had the courtesy to make one reply. IMHO that is poor net-etiquette.
09-15-2008, 03:52 PM   #43
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,284
QuoteOriginally posted by J.Scott Quote
857 views and 41 well thought-out replies .... and the OP hasn't had the courtesy to make one reply. IMHO that is poor net-etiquette.
It is a lot to chew on...perhaps the OP is overwhelmed!

Steve
09-15-2008, 05:01 PM   #44
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 506
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacEastgate Quote
True, i kind of shot myself in the foot there...

the problem is not many things in this world annoy me, but photographers being picky over their equipment (without much reason) really bugs me.

One of the things that attracted me to pentax was that there was much less pixel peepers. I find on nikon forums there are more people with too much money (and a thing for gadgets) than people who can actually take a picture. But there i go being "judgemental" again.
Understood. Also...couldn't agree with you more re the fast 50 being a great lens to work with. Some of my favorite shots are taken with an old manual 50 of my Fathers (a Pentax user from back in the 60's). Unfortunately my eyesight limits my ability to consistanly get focused shots. Again, limitation of the photographer...
09-15-2008, 07:06 PM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bangor, Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,382
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Ken, I'm probably missing your point, because it sounds like you're saying:

1) The sensor doesn't matter - the same lens will provide indistinguishable images
up to 8x10 on any sensor out there, P&S CCD sensors included.

2) The concept of a lens 'out-resolving a sensor' is a myth.


Tell me this isn't what you're saying


.
1) Any reasonably sized P & S sensor (1/1.8" or larger) or any CCD or CMOS APS-C, or 4/3 sensor with the same lens will look identical when shot at base ISO, processed through RAW, and printed at 8 X 10.

2) I haven't seen any lenses that a 10MP APS-C sensor can out resolve. There are most likely a lot of lenses that a 24MP or larger FF sensor will out resolve. There might even be a few that a 14MP APS-C senor can out resolve but I haven't found them. I'd give you 50 to 1 odds a 16-18MP FF senor will not be able to out resove any Pentax film lens ever made.
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
what is a good or bad copy of Da*16-50? nuaabill Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 11-13-2009 07:26 PM
Help - bad or good copy 16-50 ? Vaikis_ Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 10-17-2008 04:54 AM
UV filters: Good or bad? Zeroset Pentax DSLR Discussion 37 09-08-2008 06:24 PM
Are these lenses Good or Bad? Fl_Gulfer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 08-18-2008 06:56 AM
Good or bad jgredline Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 01-07-2008 11:52 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:58 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