Pentax 35mm ltd..I think I've made a mistake

larryinlc · 05-05-2009, 08:06 PM

I've had this lens for less than 3 weeks, and I'm finding it difficult to use. It's a superb lens, but for my use, the focal length is too short. I do watches...this is pretty much my entire macro interest. The lens requires me to be almost on top of the subject and then I'm in my light and diffusion. Just an observation, but I might have to trade it for a Sigma 70mm macro. In the past I've used the very fine Sigma 105, but that one is too long. So, I figure that 70mm would be just right. Isn't there a childhood story somewhere in all of this??

Larry

stevebrot · 05-05-2009, 09:29 PM

Sorry to hear that the 35 ltd has been a disappointment to you. Working distance with a short-focal length macro is a bit of a problem. You get more magnification at less extension, but you are literally on top of the subject. I have the Sigma 50/2.8 Macro and am pretty happy with it, but may eventually move up to the 70 or 105 to get the greater working distance.

Steve

Lodewijk · 05-05-2009, 11:54 PM

There's also a Tamron 60mm coming up (f2!) Tamron SP AF 60mm F/2.0 Di II Macro 1:1

If you are only photographing watches the cheaper option of extension tubes, a 50mm or longer lens and a tripod might also be an idea.

nulla · 05-05-2009, 11:59 PM

Sorry to hear that

But if you are into watches you might not have much trouble selling a "second hand"

Neil

frank · 05-06-2009, 12:19 AM

Originally posted by Lodewijk

There's also a Tamron 60mm coming up (f2!) Tamron SP AF 60mm F/2.0 Di II Macro 1:1

If you are only photographing watches the cheaper option of extension tubes, a 50mm or longer lens and a tripod might also be an idea.

That looks like a very interesting lens. Pity they don't have Pentax PK mount in their compatible list, for now

Marc Sabatella · 05-06-2009, 02:21 PM

Stick a Raynox 150 or 250 on the DA70.

Although I'm curious in what sense the 105 was "too long" - do you mean in order to get the magnification you want, you had to be too far away? Sure we can't be talking about more than a foot or two?

larryinlc · 05-06-2009, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

Stick a Raynox 150 or 250 on the DA70.

Although I'm curious in what sense the 105 was "too long" - do you mean in order to get the magnification you want, you had to be too far away? Sure we can't be talking about more than a foot or two?

Too long as in too far away. My light source is static while I hand hold paper for diffusion as I look thru the viewfinder to achieve the desired affect. Camera on tripod...and the remote in the other hand. The 105 has too much distance between my arms length and the watch to utilize diffusion paper.

On the other hand, the 35mm macro is too close. The camera will block out or interfere with the light source. I need something inbetween, I guess. This is where the 70 comes in.

Larry

Last edited by larryinlc; 05-06-2009 at 02:57 PM.

larryinlc · 05-06-2009, 02:52 PM

Here is my cheezy set-up followed by the result. As you can see, it's nothing to write home about, but it works for me. Imagine this for some diffusion while I hand-hold more paper for more. A reasonable distance is a must to accomplish this and the 105 makes me sit too far away.

Edit to add that this image was taken using the fine FA 50mm macro which I no longer have. In retrospect, this was a good focal length for me.

Larry

Rener · 05-06-2009, 03:22 PM

Wow Larry, what a beautiful macro shot, well define and detailed.

cheers,

Rene

**Sailor** · 05-06-2009, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by larryinlc

Larry

Judging by the outstanding quality of this shot, I don't think you need advice about which lens would be best - perhaps you should be the one giving advice on what lens people should use for macro.

BTW, I bought a DA 35, as well, but always thought of it as a "normal" prime that happens to have close focusing capabilities. Like you, I don't see it as a dedicated macro for the reason you mentioned in your OP.

Jer

larryinlc · 05-06-2009, 05:12 PM

"BTW, I bought a DA 35, as well, but always thought of it as a "normal" prime that happens to have close focusing capabilities"

Yep, this what I think too. The lens is most certainly a keeper, but as a dedicated macro, there are better options.

Larry

ll_coffee_lP · 05-06-2009, 07:10 PM

The Sigma 70 is a spectacular lens in every respect. Highly recommended for many shooting aspects, and great for shooting figurines, etc. - so likely perfect for watches too.

c[_]

P.S. Love the watch shot!

simico · 05-07-2009, 03:20 AM

Yes, you made a mistake. To cirrect it please send me the lens and the watch from that pic

05-05-2009, 08:06 PM	#1
larryinlc Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Wisconsin USA Posts: 993	Pentax 35mm ltd..I think I've made a mistake I've had this lens for less than 3 weeks, and I'm finding it difficult to use. It's a superb lens, but for my use, the focal length is too short. I do watches...this is pretty much my entire macro interest. The lens requires me to be almost on top of the subject and then I'm in my light and diffusion. Just an observation, but I might have to trade it for a Sigma 70mm macro. In the past I've used the very fine Sigma 105, but that one is too long. So, I figure that 70mm would be just right. Isn't there a childhood story somewhere in all of this?? Larry

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax marketing mistake :0	nixcamic	Pentax News and Rumors	34	01-11-2010 08:31 AM
K-7 - 35mm 2.8 macro made me go nuts!	eva2000	Post Your Photos!	1	08-11-2009 11:40 AM
Pentax, make no mistake	jaws	Pentax News and Rumors	7	11-12-2008 09:47 PM
istDS vs isD: how big a mistake have I made?	WMBP	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	09-01-2007 09:26 AM
Promaster 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 (made by Tokina?)	igowerf	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	05-24-2007 10:29 AM

05-05-2009, 09:29 PM	#2
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Sorry to hear that the 35 ltd has been a disappointment to you. Working distance with a short-focal length macro is a bit of a problem. You get more magnification at less extension, but you are literally on top of the subject. I have the Sigma 50/2.8 Macro and am pretty happy with it, but may eventually move up to the 70 or 105 to get the greater working distance. Steve

05-05-2009, 11:54 PM	#3
Lodewijk Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Texel/Groningen, Netherlands Posts: 41	There's also a Tamron 60mm coming up (f2!) Tamron SP AF 60mm F/2.0 Di II Macro 1:1 If you are only photographing watches the cheaper option of extension tubes, a 50mm or longer lens and a tripod might also be an idea.

05-05-2009, 11:59 PM	#4
nulla Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 1,560	Sorry to hear that But if you are into watches you might not have much trouble selling a "second hand" Neil

05-06-2009, 12:19 AM	#5
frank Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,202	Originally posted by Lodewijk There's also a Tamron 60mm coming up (f2!) Tamron SP AF 60mm F/2.0 Di II Macro 1:1 If you are only photographing watches the cheaper option of extension tubes, a 50mm or longer lens and a tripod might also be an idea. That looks like a very interesting lens. Pity they don't have Pentax PK mount in their compatible list, for now

05-06-2009, 02:21 PM	#6
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Stick a Raynox 150 or 250 on the DA70. Although I'm curious in what sense the 105 was "too long" - do you mean in order to get the magnification you want, you had to be too far away? Sure we can't be talking about more than a foot or two?

05-06-2009, 02:47 PM	#7
larryinlc Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Wisconsin USA Posts: 993 Original Poster	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Stick a Raynox 150 or 250 on the DA70. Although I'm curious in what sense the 105 was "too long" - do you mean in order to get the magnification you want, you had to be too far away? Sure we can't be talking about more than a foot or two? Too long as in too far away. My light source is static while I hand hold paper for diffusion as I look thru the viewfinder to achieve the desired affect. Camera on tripod...and the remote in the other hand. The 105 has too much distance between my arms length and the watch to utilize diffusion paper. On the other hand, the 35mm macro is too close. The camera will block out or interfere with the light source. I need something inbetween, I guess. This is where the 70 comes in. Larry Last edited by larryinlc; 05-06-2009 at 02:57 PM.

05-06-2009, 02:52 PM	#8
larryinlc Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Wisconsin USA Posts: 993 Original Poster	Here is my cheezy set-up followed by the result. As you can see, it's nothing to write home about, but it works for me. Imagine this for some diffusion while I hand-hold more paper for more. A reasonable distance is a must to accomplish this and the 105 makes me sit too far away. Edit to add that this image was taken using the fine FA 50mm macro which I no longer have. In retrospect, this was a good focal length for me. Larry

05-06-2009, 03:22 PM	#9
Rener Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 292	Wow Larry, what a beautiful macro shot, well define and detailed. cheers, Rene

05-06-2009, 04:42 PM	#10
Sailor Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Coastal Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 26,205	Originally posted by larryinlc Larry Judging by the outstanding quality of this shot, I don't think you need advice about which lens would be best - perhaps you should be the one giving advice on what lens people should use for macro. BTW, I bought a DA 35, as well, but always thought of it as a "normal" prime that happens to have close focusing capabilities. Like you, I don't see it as a dedicated macro for the reason you mentioned in your OP. Jer

05-06-2009, 05:12 PM	#11
larryinlc Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Wisconsin USA Posts: 993 Original Poster	"BTW, I bought a DA 35, as well, but always thought of it as a "normal" prime that happens to have close focusing capabilities" Yep, this what I think too. The lens is most certainly a keeper, but as a dedicated macro, there are better options. Larry

05-06-2009, 07:10 PM	#12
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	The Sigma 70 is a spectacular lens in every respect. Highly recommended for many shooting aspects, and great for shooting figurines, etc. - so likely perfect for watches too. c[_] P.S. Love the watch shot!

05-07-2009, 03:20 AM	#13
simico Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Budapest Posts: 821	Yes, you made a mistake. To cirrect it please send me the lens and the watch from that pic