[troika]

How did that crow adventure go? Thanks for linking that thread. I'm definitely gonna have to try that.

I think whether it's sooner or later, I'll end up getting this lens. I can see myself enjoying it. It just may not be the one I get for the reasons listed in my OP.

Not as intended, but it wasn't the lens's fault this time. She swooped in, grabbed her treat and was gone before I even got going this time. I did post a kind of cool, accidental image, but if you look back at my series on Sheryl the Crow you'll get an idea of what I'm going for.

I would like to capture her with the macro lens, but I think I'm stressing her out a bit with the camera and probably need to give her a bit of a break so that i can keep this going for longer.

[normhead]

I'm not sure, but,I've had this happen when locked on a tripod. I assumed up to the point that the long front lens extension and camera movement were causing the problem. And since basically being forced into using live view, I've discovered from macro mushrooms it's just flat out better to use manual focus. The narrow DoF makes finding a good hyperlocal focus point is critical/

[troika]

My best results with Sheryl so far have been manual focus on a tripod. Nothing to complain about, but I'm going to keep getting the same shot over and over if I can't shake that up a little bit.

[cyberjunkie]

Do you happen to have test images handy? While I wouldn't say the dfa100mm is tops in the 100mm range for background rendering at normal portrait distances, I would say it does nothing notably offensive (to me anyway!).

I am in Thailand now, when I'm away from home I bring with a single 1TB drive with both a LIghtroom and Aperture catalog in it. Mostly it's new pictures.
I'll check, IF (not sure!) I have something like that it would be a simple set of pictures taken in the same place, under more or less the same light, using two or three fifties. Sigma Macro EX DG 2.8/50mm, the Trioplan 2.9/50mm, and the third I really don't remember
If I have the photos on this HD I'll post them

I guess my mistake is using such a long focal length at short range hand-held. Even the slightest body movement is probably enough to confuse the AF cycle...

I am afraid you're right.
The shortcomings of the camera make it much worse.
I stuck to Pentax for almost a life, sold a Nikkormat and bought an almost new MX long long time ago, and I've used the 6x7 for professional work when 4x5" or 5x7" was not needed. So I'm so used to the good and bad of Pentax cameras to take everything as given. The pluses and the minuses, I mean...
I LOVE my K-1, in some way it made me rediscover photography, and even cured my LBA for vintage large format optics! I'm far from stopping the acquisition of vintage lenses, but at least I buy what I can actually use, and I do it with great satisfaction
I never had the chance to properly test a modern top level camera from other brands, which means that I'm unaware of how other cameras handle the AF of moving subjects. I just read about that, which is a completely different thing.
Talking to a friend, who owns a well known shop dealing in photographica, Leica, professional equipments, etc., I understood that a few problems - which I thought were not brand-specific - didn't actually plague other flagship models.
I mostly use MF lenses, and when I don't I rarely stress the limits of the AF, though I find that being aware of them actually helps the photographer. It is almost always possible to avoid the obstacle if you can't surmount it
Small unpredictable movements of the subject, either due to the wind or from the camera being shaken, are no easy ask for the AF system.
I admit I've never used catch-in AF with non-manual lenses. Maybe it could be worth trying. I'm curious to see if anybody has done that.

EDIT:
I remember that catch-in focus requires AF lenses to have a switch (AF/MF, set to MF). M42 lenses require to have a base that shortens the contacts on the camera mount. Few PK lenses are anodised, many M42 lenses are either anodised/painted or too narrow

---

Last edited by cyberjunkie; 09-13-2018 at 05:35 AM.

[Pikselisiirto]

This lens can hunt like crazy and it is loud then, if you don't first manually set the focus near the desired focus. I wish AF point would flash when its area is in focus to speed up the MF and get sharpest focus. It takes a bit time to get sharp focus with your eye and it might be a bit off from the sharpest focus.

Pentax probably could add software focus limiter to the firmware. It would help a lot with this lens.

[BrianR]

I guess my mistake is using such a long focal length at short range hand-held. Even the slightest body movement is probably enough to confuse the AF cycle...

It's not great at tracking, no. When I'm able to brace myself well, I've still had handheld AF success down to about 1:1.2 magnification. I'm more likely to use it above 1:1.5 though.

I'm not sure, but,I've had this happen when locked on a tripod. I assumed up to the point that the long front lens extension and camera movement were causing the problem. And since basically being forced into using live view, I've discovered from macro mushrooms it's just flat out better to use manual focus. The narrow DoF makes finding a good hyperlocal focus point is critical/

Provided I have something of contrast under the centre AF point that's in a stable position, I rarely ever experience any hunting. This is usually what goes wrong when trying to AF for a candid portrait resulting in the lens going for a spin- me not able to track a subject. I'm not 100% positive, but I'm reasonably convinced the F2.8 sensor in the centre of my k5iis helps with an accurate focus lock, even in pretty low lighting, so I usually stick to the centre up close.

You're always limited to where the focal points are, moreso if you're only using the centre, so if you want to put the focal plane between the mushrooms stem and the leading edge of the cap you really have no choice but manual. I'm a big fan of manual focus (I love my rail!), it's pretty much always applicable for macro or close-up work and quite often superior to AF, plus saying otherwise would make the years of often frustrating practice manually focusing seem like a waste, it's a necessary skill for macro. However, AF can be reliable and quicker in the right situations, worth exploring to see if it's workable.

I'm always setup to use back button focus, so the exif is no indication if I used AF or not, but this is exactly the sort of photo where it would have been dandy and likely what I used - something reasonably flat, with the light edge of the slime mould over the darker bark at just the right place for AF success:

[mikesbike]

In the future, I will be looking for a street photography lens with a little more reach than some of my other primes. For example, I have the 40mm XS and love it's diminutive size but there have been plenty of times where I wanted a prime with more reach and higher IQ. So I have been looking at the 100mm WR. The primary uses I would consider it for are (in order of most likely to least):

1. Outdoor street photography where reach is needed.

2. Indoor event photography.

3. Portraiture (if the subject wants more space; I have wider primes; I just figure options don't hurt since this isn't the primary reason for wanting this lens).

It's worth noting that this would be used on crop sensor but I eventually want a full frame. Do you think this lens would be a good fit for my needs? Also, if you have any photos taken in similar situations, I would love to see. I have been curious about this lens for a while. Thanks for any insight!

100mm is getting a bit long for portraiture on a crop sensor for best facial perspective, but good on a FF body. It would yield a quite narrow FOV for street photography, unless grabbing just a smaller patch of a scene at a distance. Using an all-around zoom lens to get a feel for what you'll actually get under the last two circumstances using various FLs might be a good idea before buying a 100mm prime.

If having WR is not a major need, I would suggest the DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited. It's resolution is very good to excellent edge to edge even wide open, and at f/3.2 excellent throughout. It provides a good tele effect on APS-C while still having some elbow room in the frame. Its FL is excellent for portraits on APS-C, and it is still quite good on FF. The newer HD version has superior coatings for better contrast and flare resistance, rounded aperture f/2.4 to f/5.6 and 9 diaphragm blades for better bokeh, very nice for portraits. AF is quite fast.

If WR is a must, for APS-C you might consider the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, an excellent lens with fine versatility.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 09-13-2018 at 06:51 PM.

[Sholom]

100mm is getting a bit long for portraiture on a crop sensor for best facial perspective, but good on a FF body. It would yield a quite narrow FOV for street photography, unless grabbing just a smaller patch of a scene at a distance. Using an all-around zoom lens to get a feel for what you'll actually get under the last two circumstances using various FLs might be a good idea before buying a 100mm prime.

If having WR is not a major need, I would suggest the DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited. It's resolution is very good to excellent edge to edge even wide open, and at f/3.2 excellent throughout. It provides a good tele effect on APS-C while still having some elbow room in the frame. Its FL is excellent for portraits on APS-C, and it is still quite good on FF. The newer HD version has superior coatings for better contrast and flare resistance, rounded aperture f/2.4 to f/5.6 and 9 diaphragm blades for better bokeh, very nice for portraits. AF is quite fast.

If WR is a must, for APS-C you might consider the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, an excellent lens with fine versatility.

+1 on the 70mm. It is so compact nobody will think it is a telephoto and even the older SMC version has excellent contrast and very good flare resistance. It can be forced to purple fringe, but only on very overexposed areas. i do expect the HD version will have better bokeh for portraiture and landscape, but the SMC is no slouch in that regard, albeit not comparable to the 77mm for bokeh.

[troika]

Okay, so I took a walk tonight with my D FA 100/2.8 Macro WR. I used the backbutton focus method with autofocus set on C. I don't usually shoot like this so I can't quite compare it another lens, but NOTHING was wrong with the autofocus speed and my in-focus rate was huge. There was a back-to-school bash at my son's elementary school and with a billion kids running around, I took shot after shot at different ranges and tried to go quickly from something near me to something farther back or vica versa. I tracked bouncing balls and moving kids and passing cars.

I even took rapid fire shots at cars approaching and driving away and got better results than I've been told we could get with Pentax (haven't tried this before). I don't want to post them because of license plates and I don't want to post pictures of people's kids, but it was a very good result. Hard to image it would have been much better with a non-macro lens. 100mm is pretty long on ASP-C, but most of the time, that didn't bother me.

As long as I manually moved it to the macro end (if I was shooting macro) and close to the appropriate range when I wasn't, before I touched the AF button, it didn't rack the extreme distances and hunt. That has happened a couple of times, when I went from macro to regular shot or tried to just go from normal to AF macro, but it's really easy to avoid. I think that I get why they didn't both with a limiter. I'm happy.

One negative on this lens, it purple fringes more than any lens I've ever had by a long shot. Easy to fix, but woof, it's remarkable.


Here are some random samples from tonight in mostly dusky light.


This dog was moving in and out from between people's feet and chasing smells and scraps and he was in-focus on about 9 out of 10 shots. On the 10th the AF locked on someone's leg.







This one is pretty close to 1:1 macro at f2.8 in dim light. The flower was about 1cm, maybe 1.5cm across.




This one doesn't look like it was difficult, but I pointed the camera at it and shot, which is what I was testing. Actually I pointed it in the foreground and with my finger on the AF button, just raised it to the flowers and shot. They were in focus by the time I was pointed at it, no racking.




I also own a DA70, that I bought here used and need to use more. I would have certainly gotten some good photos with it too and I'll run a similar test with it sometime, but this was a question about the macro, so here you go!

[troika]

I took it to the Washington State Fair and shot in a variety of difficult situations. Unfortunately, I forgot to bring the hood and I think it would have helped with contrast. But, honestly, there is no focus issue with this lens. The only time it hunts on me is trying to autofocus macro and part of that is me not having a feel for the minimum focus distance yet. If I'm inside of it and hit the AF button it will hunt back and forth and never land. Very easy to avoid and not an issue in walk-around or event type shooting. I'll look forward to using this lens in a local music venue and will share the results.


Playing more with continuous AF, I've accepted from reading that Pentax was terrible at it, but I'm pretty amazed at the results I'm getting. I'm not a pro sports photographer and maybe I'm not testing it right, but check out these shots.

The first was this 8 story bungee launch ride that rockets people up into the sky and the drops and bounces them a back down. I kept my thumb on the AF button, my finger on the shutter release and rapid fired shots off. 1 shot out of 22 missed focus and I think I had the focus point aimed at the sky on the shot, but the camera/lens reacquired the subject and went right back to tracking it. Nothing slow about the lens's ability to adjust focus.


You do get a taste the purple fringing, though.



I also took about a dozen of my son on this ride, which was going by pretty fast. In some ways it was harder because there were other things to take focus, but I got a bunch of keepers, as least from a focus standpoint. Not in itself a great picture. But, loving the lens.

[cyberjunkie]

Playing more with continuous AF, I've accepted from reading that Pentax was terrible at it, but I'm pretty amazed at the results I'm getting. I'm not a pro sports photographer and maybe I'm not testing it right, but check out these shots.

AFC is not terrible. It just fails in certain conditions.
Hunting is another problem, that has more to do with the way the lens was conceived/built.
If you didn't get right the kind of shots you posted, then AF would be unusable.
Far from that, the lens/camera combo hunts in specific conditions, like low light, breeze that moves the subject in an unpredictable way, or when the lens is used in AF close to MFD, especially if you have just shot a more distant subject.
The picture you posted are focused on a point distant from the camera, and the AF system finds what it's looks for (lines, distinct shapes), with a non-distracting background.
In some unfortunate circumstances you can have both, the AF that has difficulties locking focus, and the lens that lags because of its long throw.
One thing affects the other, making the problem more annoying.
Most of the times it does not happen, we just feel the inherent slowness of a lens with long throw and screwdriver AF technology.
At very close focus I think it's better to avoid AF, and focus moving the camera back and forth.
At longer distances the lens is perfectly usable in AF, it is just slower than a non-macro lens.