Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-15-2008, 06:49 PM   #16
Senior Member
Photomaximum's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 108
QuoteOriginally posted by kenyee Quote
I found that 1.4 gives too shallow a DOF as well. I usually run f/4 to give enough DOF, so I just use my Sigma 17-70 most of the time instead of my 50/1.4...

There are no rules. Food photography is a fun challenge. Its also difficult to do really well.
There are all kinds of styles from the everything in focus to the very shallow depth of field look.

10-15-2008, 07:51 PM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,147
QuoteOriginally posted by soccerjoe5 Quote
yeah i'm leaning towards the FA or D-FA 50! which one is a better one?
Given a choice between FA and D-FA I would take the FA. There is no function loss, except for the quick shift focus touch up, and with the FA you can use it on a film camera. I am not sure whether or not the FA 50 has a focus limiter as does the FA 100, but that sure improves the focus speed.
10-15-2008, 09:05 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
best lens for food photography would probably be a T-S lens

but any lens should do. just have to be creative.

usually my FA43 works pretty good to me. i don't like to get too close cuz you lose the presentation. the extra contrast comes in handy. with the FA31, i approach food at a weird angle.


one with the FA77


da21
10-15-2008, 09:20 PM   #19
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
QuoteOriginally posted by soccerjoe5 Quote
yeah i'm leaning towards the FA or D-FA 50! which one is a better one?
Have the FA 50mm macro and DFA 50mm macro as well as the FA 100mm macro and DFA 100mm f/2.8 macro so let me highlight the differences.

Both FA and DFA macros can be used on digital and film cameras, the latter without vignetting as both have image circles that can cover 35mm film cameras and have aperture rings for older film cameras that don't have electronic control of the aperture from the camera body.

In terms of build quality, the FA macros are physically bigger and heavier lenses compared to the DFA macros. DFA macros are smaller but have polycarbonate plastic construction, which makes for a lighter lens. This might be a consideration if you're in the field or shooting for extended periods. Filter size for the FA 50mm/100mm takes 52mm/58mm filters whereas both the DFA macros use a 49mm filter thread.

The FA macros have a deeply recessed front element, which means no lens hood are needed. The DFA lenses on the other hand have a clip-on lens hoods which is quite necessary when shooting at larger magnifications as the front barrel extends outwards.

Optically, the FA macros have the edge in terms of sharpness and have a more punchy colour rendition typical of FA lenses. The DFA lenses gives images that are a little more contrasty. These are probably due to changes in the lens coating. I personally prefer the FA versions.

The DFA macros have Quick Shift, which is a very useful feature allowing the user to adjust focus manually after AF. Focusing wise the Pentax macros can hunt in AF due to the long focus travel from 1:1 to infinity, especially at low light or when there is no distinct object to lock focus. At normal shooting distances, AF is fast enough.

The FA 50mm & FA 100mm macros both have a Clamp Screw that is used to tighten the rotation of the focusing ring when focusing manually to avoid any shift in focus, especially when used on a copy stand.

The FA 100mm macro has in addition a Focus Range Limiter switch. This limits the focus range either for either macro or normal shooting distances.

Both the DFA macros only have a Focus Clamp, which works similar to the Clamp Screw of the FA macros.


Last edited by creampuff; 10-15-2008 at 11:19 PM.
10-15-2008, 10:15 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 431
I think any lens around or less than 50mm can do. Macro may be benefical but to me not a must. I also believe there is no fix rule. The only rule is to be pleasant or creative.
Below are my samples with both A-50mm macro and DA*16-50mm for sharings.

A-50mm macro


A-50mm macro


DA*16-50mm


DA*16-50mm


DA*16-50mm


DA*16-50mm

Last edited by dsport; 10-15-2008 at 11:01 PM.
10-15-2008, 11:34 PM   #21
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
Have the FA 50mm macro and DFA 50mm macro as well as the FA 100mm macro and DFA 100mm f/2.8 macro so let me highlight the differences.

Both FA and DFA macros can be used on digital and film cameras, the latter without vignetting as both have image circles that can cover 35mm film cameras and have aperture rings for older film cameras that don't have electronic control of the aperture from the camera body.

In terms of build quality, the FA macros are physically bigger and heavier lenses compared to the DFA macros. DFA macros are smaller but have polycarbonate plastic construction, which makes for a lighter lens. This might be a consideration if you're in the field or shooting for extended periods. Filter size for the FA 50mm/100mm takes 52mm/58mm filters whereas both the DFA macros use a 49mm filter thread.

The FA macros have a deeply recessed front element, which means no lens hood are needed. The DFA lenses on the other hand have a clip-on lens hoods which is quite necessary when shooting at larger magnifications as the front barrel extends outwards.

Optically, the FA macros have the edge in terms of sharpness and have a more punchy colour rendition typical of FA lenses. The DFA lenses gives images that are a little more contrasty. These are probably due to changes in the lens coating. I personally prefer the FA versions.

The DFA macros have Quick Shift, which is a very useful feature allowing the user to adjust focus manually after AF. Focusing wise the Pentax macros can hunt in AF due to the long focus travel from 1:1 to infinity, especially at low light or when there is no distinct object to lock focus. At normal shooting distances, AF is fast enough.

The FA 50mm & FA 100mm macros both have a Clamp Screw that is used to tighten the rotation of the focusing ring when focusing manually to avoid any shift in focus, especially when used on a copy stand.

The FA 100mm macro has in addition a Focus Range Limiter switch. This limits the focus range either for either macro or normal shooting distances.

Both the DFA macros only have a Focus Clamp, which works similar to the Clamp Screw of the FA macros.
Wow thanks man! Most appreciated! I think I'll just go for the cheaper one I find
10-15-2008, 11:41 PM   #22
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
Depending on the photographer, there are no real rules on what lenses can be used to shoot food.

The issue here is what we all consider as food photography. In the broadest context, taking casual snaps at a restaurant/food joint might fall under the definition. However I tend to think of the term as a dedicated food photo shoot under a controlled environment where the photographer works in tandem with a food stylist to shoot to a specific brief. Lens use is less important than lighting and setting. In other words casual unplanned snaps versus a planned photo shoot.
10-15-2008, 11:45 PM   #23
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
Original Poster
The one I was referring to is the planned photo shoot type I'm going to be taking formal workshops/courses for food photography. My sister has been baking a lot at home for the past year and she's going to culinary school soon so that's how I thought of getting into food photography.

10-16-2008, 12:51 AM   #24
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
soccerjoe5, a 50mm macro is a good start. If you're serious in wanting to shoot food images, an investment in strobes and a good flash/incident handheld meter is a must in my opinion.
10-16-2008, 01:26 AM   #25
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
Original Poster
Thanks! Yeah we got some strobes and lighting equipment
10-16-2008, 01:30 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,347
I think the DA35/2.8 macro ltd would be an excellent choise. It will allow you to got from full table pictures or even restaurant or kitchen environements down to the smallest details without any borders, without switching lens. And 35mm is now a normal lens, not a wide angle. The 50's listed here are all short tele lenses on a Pentax DSLR of today. The risk is that you find that angle of view also to small. Also the 35mm will more easilly get you the deep DOF. Does not cost so much either. And next year you can complement with the new ring-macro-flash. It works fine also with a extension tube if you want to go beyound 1:1.
Should you want to complement with a macro tele, and don't want to spend money on a 2nd new lens, go for one of the old Pentax K or KA 100/4 macro, or the Tamron adaptal 2 SP 90/2.5macro. Both are plentyfull and not so expensive. But for the first lens I'd go for a normal macro (meaning normal on the sensors Pentax use today, so not 50 mm) for this purpose. Food are not like bugs. The sushi's are not going to fly from plate to plate , so keeping a long distance wont be an advantage.
10-16-2008, 01:45 AM   #27
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
Original Poster
Thanks for the input! Now I'm torn again between the 35 and 40 haha
10-16-2008, 02:15 AM   #28
Veteran Member
danielchtong's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 756
QuoteOriginally posted by soccerjoe5 Quote
the SMCP-D FA 50mm f/2.8 looks interesting too. and it's cheap!

I will go with this one as the subject is food not critters.

I would not recommend anyone shooting critters with shortish macro lens at all.

Daniel
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!
food, k-mount, macro, macro lens, mf, pentax lens, photography, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for a macro lens for bug photography mantis Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 51 09-12-2010 04:34 PM
How much magnification can a given lens give in macro photography? justtakingpics Photographic Technique 5 05-08-2010 11:37 AM
Misc First Shot at Food Photography potatolicious Photo Critique 5 10-15-2009 08:01 PM
Food photography - need advice kevinschoenmakers Photographic Technique 21 09-29-2009 03:40 PM
an attempt at food photography mhoy Post Your Photos! 12 02-01-2009 06:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:49 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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