Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-17-2008, 12:20 PM   #31
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: MT
Posts: 1,075
Flair or Ghosting?

Is Conan's issue flair or ghosting? Because the shape of the unwanted bright spot mimicks the shape of the candle flame I'm thinking ghosting? Doesn't flair tend to mimick the shape of the aperture? Someone with expertise may be able to explain...

11-17-2008, 12:21 PM   #32
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,142
QuoteOriginally posted by Marcus Quote
The only odd thing on the 50-135 is that you can turn the focus ring forever. That does seem rather cheap. I was surprised. When I found out, I remember saying to myself, "Huh?"
It's not cheap. That's the result of the quick shift focus system. The ring has to be loose enough not to rip out the gears. My 16-50 does the same.

I have two of the DA* lenses, the 16-50 and 50-135. I rate both of them among the best lenses I have ever owned in 47 years of photography. I love the idea that I don't need to panic when it starts to rain.

The 16-50 is the lens that goes on the camera when I am just out for the day. The focal range is perhaps a bit short at 50, but the 16 is just right. The PF, I find, is very dependent on the shooting aperture. Stop down a bit, and it becomes much more manageable. When shooting program mode, I find the MTF program helps here.

I shot an amateur hockey game a while ago with the 50-135, and the only focus misses were while using centre point only. It would focus on the boards between the players. I switched to multi point with two very nice effects: the focus was more often where I wanted it, and the light show from the little red spots in the viewfinder was great fun! It also told me where the lens was trying to focus so that I could adjust my shooting angle slightly when needed. Using MTF kept the lens stopped down a stop. No CAs to worry about.
11-17-2008, 12:33 PM   #33
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
I'm with you there Albert, I loved the 16-50 and the 50-135. Excellent build and optics, and awesome prices!

While I loved the Nikkor gold ring lenses, they're just way too expensive for me.

Anyway, I used the word "loved" because I sold my zooms and now just using primes hehe.
11-17-2008, 12:36 PM   #34
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
QuoteOriginally posted by Ron Boggs Quote
Is Conan's issue flair or ghosting? Because the shape of the unwanted bright spot mimicks the shape of the candle flame I'm thinking ghosting? Doesn't flair tend to mimick the shape of the aperture? Someone with expertise may be able to explain...
That's ghosting, I'm quite certain.

Conan > were you using a filter on the lens, a UV filter perhaps? That's one reason I stopped using UV filters except in times I shoot in more hazardous environments and bad weather. And those 77mm filters with good coatings are not cheap.

11-17-2008, 05:20 PM   #35
Veteran Member
Eaglerapids's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Idaho,USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,588
QuoteOriginally posted by Marcus Quote
The only odd thing on the 50-135 is that you can turn the focus ring forever
The DA* 300/4 does the same thing but I've never thought it cheap.
11-17-2008, 07:51 PM   #36
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 99
QuoteOriginally posted by soccerjoe5 Quote
That's ghosting, I'm quite certain.

Conan > were you using a filter on the lens, a UV filter perhaps? That's one reason I stopped using UV filters except in times I shoot in more hazardous environments and bad weather. And those 77mm filters with good coatings are not cheap.
Nope I don't have any filters.
11-17-2008, 11:40 PM   #37
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
QuoteOriginally posted by Conan Quote
Nope I don't have any filters.
CHILL.

Made your point. I just missed your post saying that. So looks like your lens is prone to ghosting and flaring.
11-18-2008, 05:35 AM   #38
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 99
QuoteOriginally posted by soccerjoe5 Quote
CHILL.

Made your point. I just missed your post saying that. So looks like your lens is prone to ghosting and flaring.
I don't think it's just my lens as my 16-50 does exactly the same thing. I think it's a characteristic of DA* lenses unless it doesn't happen with the 200 and 300.

11-25-2008, 07:11 AM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 597
Mm, that's odd. I have both the DA*s and I have sold most of my lenses since acquiring both... never experienced flaring or ghosting. Unless I get careless with a shot in risque lighting conditions... otherwise, both are perfect! (Well, the 16-50 is NEAR perfect compared to it's big brother...)
11-26-2008, 02:15 PM   #40
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 311
Despite the QC issues, I'm still trying very hard not to buy a DA* 16-50. The focal length just seems so convenient... maybe I can sell my FA 50 and then some.....
11-26-2008, 04:19 PM   #41
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,937
QuoteOriginally posted by Venturi Quote
I went with the Tamron 17-50/2.8 instead of the DA*16-50 largely due to price ($300 is a big margin) so I have no opinion on the 16-50 other than it's expensive.
How does the Tammy 17-50 compare to your other great lenses?
Would you recommend it / buy again?
11-26-2008, 05:50 PM   #42
Veteran Member
rfortson's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,129
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Conan Quote
What I discovered lately from DA* lenses is their susceptibility to flairing. Check this, flair from a candle using my 50-135!
Yes, I forgot to mention that. I have seen that on just a few occasions with my 50-135. I guess every beauty queen belches once in a while.

Last edited by rfortson; 12-17-2008 at 12:03 PM.
11-28-2008, 12:38 AM   #43
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
Just ordered a DA 300 on last Saturday from ProDigital and received it on Wednesday.

I haven't had much chance to take many shots with it yet, but i'm impressed already:
a. First use of a SDM lens. very quick and quiet. It works inside my house to focus except in dim light situations. Normal lighting seems to be fine with it.

b. Seems to be very sharp and pictures always come back rich in color. Prior to the 300mm, i only had the Tamron 18-250 in AF, and its a marked improvement over the long end of the Tamron.

c. The 300 is a much easier carry than a MF Pentax 400 that i also own at this time. but i wouldn't want anything heavier than this.

d. The 300 lens hood is substantial enough but it has a very poor bayonet with the lens body, and it can easily loosen. the hood also takes up too much room in my pack. I think i will try to find a replacement hood such as some of those that Adorama carries.

Other than that, i'm delighted to have this lens in my hands and will use it a lot more in the next few days.

Phil
11-28-2008, 01:39 AM   #44
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sunshine Coast - Australia
Posts: 61
QuoteOriginally posted by borno Quote
I'm diggin' my DA*300
from yesterday;

That's a tremendous shot, Tom. The ripples and the reflection are most evocative.
11-28-2008, 04:45 AM   #45
Veteran Member
gkopeliadis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ATHENS, GREECE
Posts: 311
QuoteOriginally posted by Conan Quote
What I discovered lately from DA* lenses is their susceptibility to flairing. Check this, flair from a candle using my 50-135!
Yes... The reason I got rid of DA* 50-135 though reasonably sharp and very contrasty. See this and this

My poor kit lens fares much better in this aspect.
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!
77ltd, contrast, da*200, experiences, focus, joy, k-mount, lens, lenses, pentax lens, razor, shots, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-7 experiences (by an amateur) bymy141 Pentax DSLR Discussion 33 09-26-2009 03:02 PM
Sigma430EF - any experiences axl Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 2 08-19-2009 03:36 PM
Any experiences with new DA L 18-55? jsherman999 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 12-08-2008 04:46 PM
pentax 28mm f/2 - any experiences? q10 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 05-12-2008 06:33 AM
Pentax K20D experiences gubak Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 04-06-2008 10:13 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:59 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