Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-27-2009, 11:16 AM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Because the adjustment is routinely available during raw conversion, and CA is only one of many qualities that a lens should be chosen for.
After that, you can decide if the lens' native contrast, sharpness, bokeh or whatever else works for you.
Or, just go out and take some pictures and forget about pointless exercises.
You still didn't answer the question. Contrast is adjusted in RAW just as easily as CA. So why shouldn't we increase/decrease contrast and then decide if the lens' native amount of CA, sharpness and bokeh work for us? It seems like you think CA should somehow not be considered when comparing lenses....but for some ppl CA is very important.

Kind regards
.lars

09-27-2009, 11:20 AM   #32
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
Original Poster
Maybe the A* 85/1.4 is not so bad after all... Most of these are stopped down *a little*, only one is wide open:

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.
09-27-2009, 12:32 PM   #33
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,065
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
You still didn't answer the question. Contrast is adjusted in RAW just as easily as CA. So why shouldn't we increase/decrease contrast and then decide if the lens' native amount of CA, sharpness and bokeh work for us? It seems like you think CA should somehow not be considered when comparing lenses....but for some ppl CA is very important.

Kind regards
.lars
I actually did answer the question, but let me go into a bit more depth for you.
As you mentioned, pretty much everything is adjustable during raw conversion.
Contrast can be adjusted on a macro level, but not really well on a micro level.
This is why I tend to leave native contrast in the mix when I look at what lenses are doing for me.
We can adjust sharpness with many tools, but all of them are a trade-off towards lessening fine detail.
Consequently, I look at native sharpness as being something that is important to compare.
Also, adjusting sharpness and to a lesser extent, contrast can really bugger up bokeh, so again, native sharpness/contrast is quite important.
CA can be adjusted or fixed in raw conversion without having any (or very little, anyway) effect on other imaging properties, and frankly, a well calibrated raw converter will remove CA as a matter of course from a lens that has it, in the same way that a badly adjusted converter can introduce what appears to be CA in a lens that is, in fact, free from it.

With this in mind, it is just as easy to say that if a lens is showing CA, it is as much a raw conversion issue as it is a lens problem.

For me, CA is only important if I can't remove it during conversion. I can't see how it would be very important to anyone, unless they had something else on their agenda
09-27-2009, 01:00 PM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
I actually did answer the question, but let me go into a bit more depth for you.
As you mentioned, pretty much everything is adjustable during raw conversion.
Contrast can be adjusted on a macro level, but not really well on a micro level.
This is why I tend to leave native contrast in the mix when I look at what lenses are doing for me.
We can adjust sharpness with many tools, but all of them are a trade-off towards lessening fine detail.
Consequently, I look at native sharpness as being something that is important to compare.
Also, adjusting sharpness and to a lesser extent, contrast can really bugger up bokeh, so again, native sharpness/contrast is quite important.
CA can be adjusted or fixed in raw conversion without having any (or very little, anyway) effect on other imaging properties, and frankly, a well calibrated raw converter will remove CA as a matter of course from a lens that has it, in the same way that a badly adjusted converter can introduce what appears to be CA in a lens that is, in fact, free from it.

With this in mind, it is just as easy to say that if a lens is showing CA, it is as much a raw conversion issue as it is a lens problem.

For me, CA is only important if I can't remove it during conversion. I can't see how it would be very important to anyone, unless they had something else on their agenda

I agree with you regarding sharpness, but I have never had any problems boosting contrast. However, my disappointment with the A* 85 was not really related to CA. To me it didn't excel in sharpness or rendering in general, but maybe I expected too much. I tested this lens myself for 1 month and even though it's a fine lens I don't understand why it's so hyped up.

Kind regards
.lars

09-27-2009, 01:43 PM   #35
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by Roland303 Quote
Finally the M 85 f/2.0 surprised me with how well it does and competes very well with the best.
That is interesting indeed. SOmehow the old M 85/2 acquired a poor reputation. I don't know why. I use it rarely, but when I use it, it holds up nicely. The real advantage of that lens is its diminutive size, compared to my FA 85/1.4, which makes it a perfect choice for travelling, walking or street photography.

Ben
09-27-2009, 03:01 PM   #36
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,065
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
I agree with you regarding sharpness, but I have never had any problems boosting contrast. However, my disappointment with the A* 85 was not really related to CA. To me it didn't excel in sharpness or rendering in general, but maybe I expected too much. I tested this lens myself for 1 month and even though it's a fine lens I don't understand why it's so hyped up.

Kind regards
.lars
The A*85/1.4 is one of my favourite lenses. I've found it to be extremely sharp and with very pleasing rendering.
Of course by f/8 the M85/2 isn't really all that far behind, and the 77 is pretty much as good as the A*85 once stopped down a bit.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ben_Edict Quote
That is interesting indeed. SOmehow the old M 85/2 acquired a poor reputation. I don't know why. I use it rarely, but when I use it, it holds up nicely. The real advantage of that lens is its diminutive size, compared to my FA 85/1.4, which makes it a perfect choice for travelling, walking or street photography.

Ben
+1 on the M85/2. It's a lens that I never thought got the respect it deserved. It is a fine performer
09-27-2009, 04:16 PM   #37
Veteran Member
treebeard's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Windham, NH
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 795
I need to get a 77 Limited.
09-27-2009, 09:02 PM   #38
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
M 85 oh yeah baby

Finally, the little M 85 f/2 getting some much-deserved props!

My Favorite Lens?


.

09-28-2009, 08:11 AM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
This test illustrates well why I don't buy or use old lenses... very poor contrast. Old lens coatings simply cannot make it, whatever the reputation of the lens.
I am rather confident I could list a few portraits here with modern and old glass and you would not be able to pick which is taken using the old ones.
09-28-2009, 03:16 PM   #40
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
Thanks for this comparision! It's good to see that my dear Pancolar up there with the best lenses.
09-29-2009, 02:19 AM   #41
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,348
Very interresting thread. Eagerly awaiting the continuation...
09-29-2009, 04:15 AM   #42
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,054
Independently of reputation and price, the A* 85/1.4 is easily the winner in this comparison, AFAIC. Great sharpness and beautiful bokeh. At this size there is no CA that bothers me at all. And as Wheatfield says, it is one lens problem that nowadays can easily be fixed without impacting on other image properties.
09-29-2009, 04:29 AM   #43
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden Quote
Very interresting thread. Eagerly awaiting the continuation...
Believe me, I'm very busy with this, but also waiting for the arrival of the 83mm f/1.9 Asahi-Kogaku Takumar. It has 7 elements in 4 groups, so actually it has more elements than all of the later short-telephoto Takumars. Would be interesting to see how it performs!
09-29-2009, 06:18 AM   #44
Veteran Member
Fixcinater's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 409
This is pretty sweet. Thanks for putting in the work and posting it up. Neat to see how the old glass stacks up against the computer-designed modern variations on the same theme.
09-29-2009, 10:24 AM   #45
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Independently of reputation and price, the A* 85/1.4 is easily the winner in this comparison, AFAIC. Great sharpness and beautiful bokeh.
You must be seeing something I can't see. Sharpness and contrast are both less than other lenses. Bokeh is the same or marginally better. Best I've seen for that is Voigtlander of 200mm macro.
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, portrait, slr lens, subject, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
People Portrait Exercise Jun 19 danielchtong Post Your Photos! 1 06-27-2010 06:58 AM
For Sale - Sold: EX+++ Canon EF USM 100mm f/2.0 Fast Portrait Lens, Worldwide Shipping wallyb Sold Items 1 12-01-2009 11:23 AM
For Sale - Sold: Minolta Rokkor 85mm f/1.7 Fast Portrait Lens converted to M42 Mount wallyb Sold Items 6 02-26-2009 10:55 AM
Examples from long teles which don't include birds? Jasvox Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 49 01-29-2009 11:10 PM
Who says Pentax don't have long teles? 2 x 780mm lens coming Katsura Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 09-26-2007 10:38 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:42 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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