dear pentax: please make a 200mm/2 :-)

Darren M · 07-16-2009, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by kenyee

Very true. He said straight out of Lightroom and that app does have some basic PP'ing it can do, including vignetting. That lens doesn't have vignetting.

Lightroom has far more than "some basic PP'ing it can do". Many people use Lightroom exclusively for PP now. Look at Keitha's photos; I believe that she uses LR almost exclusively now and her photos are fantastically finished, but by no means are they unprocessed.

Quote:

Not as much pop IMHO, but I get the point (not all the 200/2 images in that thread I linked pop either). As long as you'd agree that some lenses have a higher "pop" ratio, which is why some people like the 43Ltd and 77Ltd (and FA*85/1.4 which Pentax really should keep making because they're discontinuing the 77Ltd and the 55/1.8 doesn't cut it)-:

Are you certain they are discontinuing the 77? I am not saying they aren't, but I do know that they have moved production of the 31mm to the plant in Viet Nam and I would be surprised if they don't follow suit on the 77. I could be wrong though. The 55/1.4 is perfectly capable of producing shots like you have linked to (allowing for perspective differences, which do matter), provided the lighting and processing are done in a similar way. I would not argue that some lenses produce a higher "pop ratio, but I still believe that you are giving the lens too much credit and not paying enough attention to how those shots are lit and processed.

Manel Brand · 07-17-2009, 03:11 AM

Originally posted by kenyee

And sorry, Daniel. The 200/2's photos are way better than what you posted. The subjects do an almost 3D "pop" off the background (like some of the stuff you see off the 43Ltd or 77Ltd when something just works right). It's a fairly common effect from a 200/2 (similar for the Canon/Nikon variants) from the images I've seen.

Not disregarding the quality of Nikon or Canon Lenses, we have to point out the fact that those 200/2 photo are heavily Post Processed and shot at highly controlled light conditions and Daniel's photos look like as they come straight out of the camera with no great care for composition either.

kenyee · 07-17-2009, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by Darren M

Are you certain they are discontinuing the 77?

Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it.

And you're right about processing/lighting helping images pop. To get the pseudo-3D effect (what I refer to as "pop"), it's a combo of background blur, sharpness/contrast of the main subject, lighting to make the subject look more 3d (like a shaded graphical sphere). I think someone in that FM thread mentioned that some of the images looked like the people were superimposed on a fake background which is a side effect of making something look "3D" in what's inherently a 2D medium...

jsherman999 · 07-17-2009, 08:15 AM

This guy always has great examples from his Nikon 200 f/2, an enormous, expensive, but great lens:

Link to 200 f/2 droolisms.

.

Darren M · 07-17-2009, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by kenyee

Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it.

Ned not replying doesn't convince me one way or the other. Like I said, they have moved production of the 31mm to Viet Nam and that is also an FA Ltd. If they have moved the 31 production to VN, why not the 77? I would also think that the 77, which sells for a considerably higher price than the 70, also provides higher margins with long since amortized development costs.

egordon99 · 07-17-2009, 10:45 AM

Canon EF 200mm f/2 L IS USM - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Me want the 200/2....Canon has a $500 rebate going on right now as well

The great thing about 200/2 is that you don't have to be really close/tight to get a nicely blurred background.

I decided to sock away the $4800 and ended up buying a 24-70L f/2.8 instead....

kristoffon · 07-17-2009, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by kenyee

Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it.

You can't be serious.

This is bullshit.

To take such strong conclusions from a completely IRRELEVANT fact is just irresponsible.

Not that I care, though - I already have my 77 so for all I care they can stop making them.

danielchtong · 07-17-2009, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by kenyee

Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it.

Top rate and convincing argument indeed

I did not read too much about FA vs DA lens argument. Now I know

Daniel

danielchtong · 07-17-2009, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by jsherman999

This guy always has great examples from his Nikon 200 f/2, an enormous, expensive, but great lens:

.

D700 white balance seems to be off ? Or my laptop needs to be recalibrated?

With a lens 1/4 of the price . From DA200mm

Daniel

kenyee · 07-17-2009, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by Darren M

Like I said, they have moved production of the 31mm to Viet Nam and that is also an FA Ltd. If they have moved the 31 production to VN, why not the 77?

True...I didn't know they moved production of the 31Ltd to Vietnam. We'll know in about a year or so. It's purely an inference/guess on my part (obviously :-) based on the lens correction being only built into DA lenses ...

kenyee · 07-17-2009, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by danielchtong

FWIW, yours looks a bit bluish on my calibrated LCD. The other image was shot in sunlight so it's warmish as it should be IMHO.

Darren M · 07-17-2009, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by kenyee

FWIW, yours looks a bit bluish on my calibrated LCD. The other image was shot in sunlight so it's warmish as it should be IMHO.

I have to agree here. The first shot looks like it was taken late afternoon in warm, beautiful light and the colours look spot on. The second is way too blue and a little too magenta as well. White balance on the first seems far better to me. Daniel, maybe you need to calibrate your screen?

terminator · 07-18-2009, 08:15 PM

Does it AF? Sorry, manual focus lens is out of the competition.

Originally posted by kerrowdown

Remember there is already is a SMC Pentax-A* 135mm F1.8 out there, that would do this job.

Oops sorry ivoire, just spotted your post, you beat me to it

terminator · 07-18-2009, 08:21 PM

I have a lot of Canon lens that can take the same photo as yours. But f/2 at 200mm, it is something unique.

Originally posted by danielchtong

D700 white balance seems to be off ? Or my laptop needs to be recalibrated?

With a lens 1/4 of the price . From DA200mm

Daniel

Blue · 07-18-2009, 09:13 PM

Originally posted by terminator

Does it AF? Sorry, manual focus lens is out of the competition.

No if you are referring to the A*. Only F, FA and DA star lenses AF.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Dear Pentax	anomaly	Product Suggestions and Feedback	1342	8 Hours Ago 04:25 PM
Misc Oh dear, oh dear, oh deer...	Rense	Post Your Photos!	5	11-05-2010 07:41 PM
dear pentax please be more careful	anepo	Photographic Technique	2	06-08-2010 11:43 AM
dear Pentax.......	nathancombs	Post Your Photos!	5	01-04-2008 11:17 PM
My Dear, Dear Friends: Don't Do This.	Mike Cash	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	12-07-2007 11:08 PM

07-16-2009, 06:43 PM	#46
Darren M Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Taipei, Taiwan Posts: 130	Originally posted by kenyee Very true. He said straight out of Lightroom and that app does have some basic PP'ing it can do, including vignetting. That lens doesn't have vignetting. Lightroom has far more than "some basic PP'ing it can do". Many people use Lightroom exclusively for PP now. Look at Keitha's photos; I believe that she uses LR almost exclusively now and her photos are fantastically finished, but by no means are they unprocessed. Quote: Not as much pop IMHO, but I get the point (not all the 200/2 images in that thread I linked pop either). As long as you'd agree that some lenses have a higher "pop" ratio, which is why some people like the 43Ltd and 77Ltd (and FA*85/1.4 which Pentax really should keep making because they're discontinuing the 77Ltd and the 55/1.8 doesn't cut it)-: Are you certain they are discontinuing the 77? I am not saying they aren't, but I do know that they have moved production of the 31mm to the plant in Viet Nam and I would be surprised if they don't follow suit on the 77. I could be wrong though. The 55/1.4 is perfectly capable of producing shots like you have linked to (allowing for perspective differences, which do matter), provided the lighting and processing are done in a similar way. I would not argue that some lenses produce a higher "pop ratio, but I still believe that you are giving the lens too much credit and not paying enough attention to how those shots are lit and processed.

07-17-2009, 03:11 AM	#47
Manel Brand Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Porto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 853	Originally posted by kenyee And sorry, Daniel. The 200/2's photos are way better than what you posted. The subjects do an almost 3D "pop" off the background (like some of the stuff you see off the 43Ltd or 77Ltd when something just works right). It's a fairly common effect from a 200/2 (similar for the Canon/Nikon variants) from the images I've seen. Not disregarding the quality of Nikon or Canon Lenses, we have to point out the fact that those 200/2 photo are heavily Post Processed and shot at highly controlled light conditions and Daniel's photos look like as they come straight out of the camera with no great care for composition either.

07-17-2009, 07:43 AM	#48
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026 Original Poster	Originally posted by Darren M Are you certain they are discontinuing the 77? Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it. And you're right about processing/lighting helping images pop. To get the pseudo-3D effect (what I refer to as "pop"), it's a combo of background blur, sharpness/contrast of the main subject, lighting to make the subject look more 3d (like a shaded graphical sphere). I think someone in that FM thread mentioned that some of the images looked like the people were superimposed on a fake background which is a side effect of making something look "3D" in what's inherently a 2D medium...

07-17-2009, 08:15 AM	#49
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	This guy always has great examples from his Nikon 200 f/2, an enormous, expensive, but great lens: Link to 200 f/2 droolisms. .

07-17-2009, 09:30 AM	#50
Darren M Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Taipei, Taiwan Posts: 130	Originally posted by kenyee Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it. Ned not replying doesn't convince me one way or the other. Like I said, they have moved production of the 31mm to Viet Nam and that is also an FA Ltd. If they have moved the 31 production to VN, why not the 77? I would also think that the 77, which sells for a considerably higher price than the 70, also provides higher margins with long since amortized development costs.

07-17-2009, 10:45 AM	#51
egordon99 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Outside of Philly Posts: 1,561	Canon EF 200mm f/2 L IS USM - Canon Digital Photography Forums Me want the 200/2....Canon has a $500 rebate going on right now as well The great thing about 200/2 is that you don't have to be really close/tight to get a nicely blurred background. I decided to sock away the $4800 and ended up buying a 24-70L f/2.8 instead....

07-17-2009, 11:01 AM	#52
kristoffon Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Brazil Posts: 532	Originally posted by kenyee Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it. You can't be serious. This is bullshit. To take such strong conclusions from a completely IRRELEVANT fact is just irresponsible. Not that I care, though - I already have my 77 so for all I care they can stop making them.

07-17-2009, 11:38 AM	#53
danielchtong Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 885	Originally posted by kenyee Just a strong suspicion because Ned Bunnell didn't reply to a person who asked, so something is going on w/ the FA lenses. And Pentax no doubt wants to push DA lenses for the lens correction now that the K7 supports it. Top rate and convincing argument indeed I did not read too much about FA vs DA lens argument. Now I know Daniel

07-17-2009, 11:44 AM	#54
danielchtong Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 885	Originally posted by jsherman999 This guy always has great examples from his Nikon 200 f/2, an enormous, expensive, but great lens: . D700 white balance seems to be off ? Or my laptop needs to be recalibrated? With a lens 1/4 of the price . From DA200mm Daniel

07-17-2009, 02:11 PM	#55
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026 Original Poster	Originally posted by Darren M Like I said, they have moved production of the 31mm to Viet Nam and that is also an FA Ltd. If they have moved the 31 production to VN, why not the 77? True...I didn't know they moved production of the 31Ltd to Vietnam. We'll know in about a year or so. It's purely an inference/guess on my part (obviously :-) based on the lens correction being only built into DA lenses ...

07-17-2009, 02:13 PM	#56
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026 Original Poster	Originally posted by danielchtong FWIW, yours looks a bit bluish on my calibrated LCD. The other image was shot in sunlight so it's warmish as it should be IMHO.

07-17-2009, 07:55 PM	#57
Darren M Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Taipei, Taiwan Posts: 130	Originally posted by kenyee FWIW, yours looks a bit bluish on my calibrated LCD. The other image was shot in sunlight so it's warmish as it should be IMHO. I have to agree here. The first shot looks like it was taken late afternoon in warm, beautiful light and the colours look spot on. The second is way too blue and a little too magenta as well. White balance on the first seems far better to me. Daniel, maybe you need to calibrate your screen?

07-18-2009, 08:15 PM	#58
terminator New Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: California Posts: 20	Does it AF? Sorry, manual focus lens is out of the competition. Originally posted by kerrowdown Remember there is already is a SMC Pentax-A* 135mm F1.8 out there, that would do this job. Oops sorry ivoire, just spotted your post, you beat me to it

07-18-2009, 08:21 PM	#59
terminator New Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: California Posts: 20	I have a lot of Canon lens that can take the same photo as yours. But f/2 at 200mm, it is something unique. Originally posted by danielchtong D700 white balance seems to be off ? Or my laptop needs to be recalibrated? With a lens 1/4 of the price . From DA200mm Daniel

07-18-2009, 09:13 PM	#60
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by terminator Does it AF? Sorry, manual focus lens is out of the competition. No if you are referring to the A*. Only F, FA and DA star lenses AF.