"Best" lens for this?

FHPhotographer · 01-11-2010, 03:58 PM

Taken with a K20 and DA-35, is there a Pentax AF prime that will give more detail and contrast for this kind of B&W image? I don't want to go any wider and not too long to keep it useful for an all-around lens, so I'm looking at the Pentax 43, 55 and 70mm. Thanks,
Brian

Caat · 01-11-2010, 04:38 PM

The 70mm will be a fair bit longer than either the 43mm or the 55mm. The 43 will be sharper tha the 35mm but probably won't have more pure contrast.

I have the 35mm Macro but am not nearly as enamoured with it as some people. I also have the 43mm Ltd and I much prefer it for general photography (obviously it can't do macro).

The other lens to consider would be the 31mm Ltd - but that's hugely expensive now (at least in the UK).

Having said all this I am surprised you are finding the 35mm lacking in contrast and sharpness for this kind of picture.

**Lowell Goudge** · 01-11-2010, 04:40 PM

as far as focal length goes, crop the image in a 2:3 ratio and once cropped measure the percentage of the image linearly. i.e. if your old image was 2000 x 3000 pixels and the new one is only 1000 x 1500 you would have a crop factor of 1/2 and you would need double the focal length.

as for contrast etc, that is more of a PP issue or JPEG settings issue. You can also (for B&W) use layers in PP and modify one color so that you get higher contrast boost between especially red and green since they both have similar values in illumination (the same effect was achieved by putting red and green filters over the lens for B&W film to boost contrast between redd flowers on green leaves.

asdf · 01-11-2010, 04:43 PM

You can also try unsharp mask (after scaling).

Last edited by asdf; 01-11-2010 at 04:50 PM.

stevebrot · 01-11-2010, 05:11 PM

Your DA 35 is a sharp and contrasty optic. Sorry Brian...but you might have to go to film for really nice B&W. Even the best of my B&W conversions are poor next to my average film scans. Part of the equation is tonality and part is dynamic range. Part is how the digital engine renders texture. Hard to describe, but easy to show when comparing pictures of weathered wood, grass, sand, rough stone, etc..

Steve

Wheatfield · 01-11-2010, 05:36 PM

Is there a lens that gives more detail and contrast than the DA35? My understanding is that it is just about as good a lens as a lens can be.

farfisa · 01-11-2010, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by FHPhotographer

Taken with a K20 and DA-35, is there a Pentax AF prime that will give more detail and contrast for this kind of B&W image? I don't want to go any wider and not too long to keep it useful for an all-around lens, so I'm looking at the Pentax 43, 55 and 70mm. Thanks,
Brian

All of those lenses will give you excellent detail and contrast, but not noticeably better (or any better) than the DA35. I preferred 43 over 35 as a focal length though, and like the way it draws better.

FHPhotographer · 01-11-2010, 10:23 PM

farfisa, I don't know this term "...and (I) like the way it draws better." Thanks for any feedback,
Brian

FHPhotographer · 01-11-2010, 10:29 PM

Steve, that's not good news. I've been working with every B&W conversion I can find, including NIK Silver Efex Pro and every PS4 method, and I can't get the kind of micro contrast and acutance I want, so I may be on a fool's errand trying to get film B&W quality out of digital,
Brian

FHPhotographer · 01-11-2010, 10:34 PM

Wheat, the DA-35 may be as good as it gets, I don't know. So far I've tried the DA-35 and FA-35, and both the FA f/1.4 and 1.7 50s, and they're all too close to call. I was hoping somebody here had some specific experience with a lens that works for them with the kind of urban B&W images I'm going after,
Brian

FHPhotographer · 01-11-2010, 10:38 PM

Caat, thanks for the feedback. I am coming to agree with you about the DA-35; it's good, but I have to agree with you that the DA-35 doesn't seem that much better than others in the 35-50mm range, except for the macro which is quite good indeed. I don't think it's "lacking," I'm just fishing around for the best possible combination with the K20. Unlike some other folks, I'm a one-lens kind of guy and so I want to find the ultimate all-purpose lens for these kinds of shots. Zooms aren't going to do it, so it's primes,
Bria

stevebrot · 01-12-2010, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by FHPhotographer

Steve, that's not good news. I've been working with every B&W conversion I can find, including NIK Silver Efex Pro and every PS4 method, and I can't get the kind of micro contrast and acutance I want, so I may be on a fool's errand trying to get film B&W quality out of digital,
Brian

Those are some pretty sophisticated tools. I would have thought that the NIK product would be up to the challenge. I don't remember, do you have a history with shooting film? If so, it might be worth dusting off the film camera and trying the "figital" approach. Good B&W films are readily available that provide wide dynamic range and high acuity. The big bind is scanning. The hardware is expensive, even used. There is also a bit of a learning curve, both in the development process and in learning the scanner.

You might want to take a gander at the threads over on the film forum. There is some pretty good work being done over there.

Pentax Film SLR Discussion - PentaxForums.com

Steve

FHPhotographer · 01-12-2010, 12:15 PM

Steve, I agree NIK should handle it, so maybe I haven't gotten it down correctly. I have no film history to speak of, other than a couple of rolls of Tri-X run through a friend's borrowed Olympus back in the mid-1970s. I am, however, going to check out your link and take a look at borrowing/renting a film camera and seeing what's what. Thanks for the suggestions,
Brian

stevebrot · 01-12-2010, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by FHPhotographer

Steve, I agree NIK should handle it, so maybe I haven't gotten it down correctly. I have no film history to speak of, other than a couple of rolls of Tri-X run through a friend's borrowed Olympus back in the mid-1970s. I am, however, going to check out your link and take a look at borrowing/renting a film camera and seeing what's what. Thanks for the suggestions,
Brian

Careful...film is addictive, sort of like being a wine connoisseur.

Steve

m8o · 01-12-2010, 10:12 PM

surprised I noone suggested the 28mm shift. Now, I'll be sorry I said anything. ...don't need any more eBay'ers outbidding me... :ugh:

01-11-2010, 03:58 PM	#1
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297	"Best" lens for this? Taken with a K20 and DA-35, is there a Pentax AF prime that will give more detail and contrast for this kind of B&W image? I don't want to go any wider and not too long to keep it useful for an all-around lens, so I'm looking at the Pentax 43, 55 and 70mm. Thanks, Brian

01-12-2010, 12:13 AM	#12
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by FHPhotographer Steve, that's not good news. I've been working with every B&W conversion I can find, including NIK Silver Efex Pro and every PS4 method, and I can't get the kind of micro contrast and acutance I want, so I may be on a fool's errand trying to get film B&W quality out of digital, Brian Those are some pretty sophisticated tools. I would have thought that the NIK product would be up to the challenge. I don't remember, do you have a history with shooting film? If so, it might be worth dusting off the film camera and trying the "figital" approach. Good B&W films are readily available that provide wide dynamic range and high acuity. The big bind is scanning. The hardware is expensive, even used. There is also a bit of a learning curve, both in the development process and in learning the scanner. You might want to take a gander at the threads over on the film forum. There is some pretty good work being done over there. Pentax Film SLR Discussion - PentaxForums.com Steve

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Do custom "artistic" or even "funny" lens caps evenexist?	lovemehate	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	33	02-10-2016 09:10 AM
Which Zoom Lens? "Tamron AF 18-250mm", "Pentax-DA 18-250mm" or "Sigma 18-250mm"	hoomanshb	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	07-30-2010 09:50 AM
K-mount Experts: How to convert a "KAF2" lens to "KF"?	panoguy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	07-08-2010 05:20 PM
"Hunger for a DA50-135?" or "The DA50-135 as a bird lens!" or "Iron age birds?"	Douglas_of_Sweden	Post Your Photos!	4	08-13-2008 06:09 AM
What is difference "APO" and "ED" glass in a lens?	kathyk	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-06-2008 08:59 AM

01-11-2010, 04:38 PM	#2
Caat Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: United Kingdom Photos: Albums Posts: 927	The 70mm will be a fair bit longer than either the 43mm or the 55mm. The 43 will be sharper tha the 35mm but probably won't have more pure contrast. I have the 35mm Macro but am not nearly as enamoured with it as some people. I also have the 43mm Ltd and I much prefer it for general photography (obviously it can't do macro). The other lens to consider would be the 31mm Ltd - but that's hugely expensive now (at least in the UK). Having said all this I am surprised you are finding the 35mm lacking in contrast and sharpness for this kind of picture.

01-11-2010, 04:40 PM	#3
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	as far as focal length goes, crop the image in a 2:3 ratio and once cropped measure the percentage of the image linearly. i.e. if your old image was 2000 x 3000 pixels and the new one is only 1000 x 1500 you would have a crop factor of 1/2 and you would need double the focal length. as for contrast etc, that is more of a PP issue or JPEG settings issue. You can also (for B&W) use layers in PP and modify one color so that you get higher contrast boost between especially red and green since they both have similar values in illumination (the same effect was achieved by putting red and green filters over the lens for B&W film to boost contrast between redd flowers on green leaves.

01-11-2010, 04:43 PM	#4
asdf Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 1,252	You can also try unsharp mask (after scaling). Last edited by asdf; 01-11-2010 at 04:50 PM.

01-11-2010, 05:11 PM	#5
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Your DA 35 is a sharp and contrasty optic. Sorry Brian...but you might have to go to film for really nice B&W. Even the best of my B&W conversions are poor next to my average film scans. Part of the equation is tonality and part is dynamic range. Part is how the digital engine renders texture. Hard to describe, but easy to show when comparing pictures of weathered wood, grass, sand, rough stone, etc.. Steve

01-11-2010, 05:36 PM	#6
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Is there a lens that gives more detail and contrast than the DA35? My understanding is that it is just about as good a lens as a lens can be.

01-11-2010, 05:59 PM	#7
farfisa Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,274	Originally posted by FHPhotographer Taken with a K20 and DA-35, is there a Pentax AF prime that will give more detail and contrast for this kind of B&W image? I don't want to go any wider and not too long to keep it useful for an all-around lens, so I'm looking at the Pentax 43, 55 and 70mm. Thanks, Brian All of those lenses will give you excellent detail and contrast, but not noticeably better (or any better) than the DA35. I preferred 43 over 35 as a focal length though, and like the way it draws better.

01-11-2010, 10:23 PM	#8
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297 Original Poster	farfisa, I don't know this term "...and (I) like the way it draws better." Thanks for any feedback, Brian

01-11-2010, 10:29 PM	#9
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297 Original Poster	Steve, that's not good news. I've been working with every B&W conversion I can find, including NIK Silver Efex Pro and every PS4 method, and I can't get the kind of micro contrast and acutance I want, so I may be on a fool's errand trying to get film B&W quality out of digital, Brian

01-11-2010, 10:34 PM	#10
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297 Original Poster	Wheat, the DA-35 may be as good as it gets, I don't know. So far I've tried the DA-35 and FA-35, and both the FA f/1.4 and 1.7 50s, and they're all too close to call. I was hoping somebody here had some specific experience with a lens that works for them with the kind of urban B&W images I'm going after, Brian

01-11-2010, 10:38 PM	#11
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297 Original Poster	Caat, thanks for the feedback. I am coming to agree with you about the DA-35; it's good, but I have to agree with you that the DA-35 doesn't seem that much better than others in the 35-50mm range, except for the macro which is quite good indeed. I don't think it's "lacking," I'm just fishing around for the best possible combination with the K20. Unlike some other folks, I'm a one-lens kind of guy and so I want to find the ultimate all-purpose lens for these kinds of shots. Zooms aren't going to do it, so it's primes, Bria

01-12-2010, 12:15 PM	#13
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297 Original Poster	Steve, I agree NIK should handle it, so maybe I haven't gotten it down correctly. I have no film history to speak of, other than a couple of rolls of Tri-X run through a friend's borrowed Olympus back in the mid-1970s. I am, however, going to check out your link and take a look at borrowing/renting a film camera and seeing what's what. Thanks for the suggestions, Brian

01-12-2010, 08:03 PM	#14
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by FHPhotographer Steve, I agree NIK should handle it, so maybe I haven't gotten it down correctly. I have no film history to speak of, other than a couple of rolls of Tri-X run through a friend's borrowed Olympus back in the mid-1970s. I am, however, going to check out your link and take a look at borrowing/renting a film camera and seeing what's what. Thanks for the suggestions, Brian Careful...film is addictive, sort of like being a wine connoisseur. Steve

01-12-2010, 10:12 PM	#15
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	surprised I noone suggested the 28mm shift. Now, I'll be sorry I said anything. ...don't need any more eBay'ers outbidding me... :ugh: