Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-28-2010, 09:16 AM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Richmond, VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 86
SMC A 35 - 105mm 3.5 and ghosting on digital

Any opinions on how much of a problem film lens on digital ghosting is with this lens, versus a 50mm 1.4 M? (my only reference)
Thanks,
Charles

03-29-2010, 01:21 AM   #2
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
QuoteOriginally posted by c a sugg Quote
Any opinions on how much of a problem film lens on digital ghosting is with this lens, versus a 50mm 1.4 M? (my only reference)
Thanks,
Charles
I've never had that problem with mine. Some samples in a set on my Flickr account if that would be of any use to you.
03-29-2010, 02:24 AM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 25
Ghosting is not an issue with any current Pentax digital body regardless of lens; the 35-105/3.5 is a fantastic lens, with near prime-like IQ, you won't be disapointed.
03-29-2010, 07:05 PM   #4
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,464
35-105 vs. 50mm f/1.4

I don't agree that ghosting is "never" an issue with the old lenses and new sensors, but I would agree that the worry is generally overstated - especially with the better, older lenses.

I have both the m-50 f/1.4 and the A35-105 f/3.5. Not easy to compare - as the 50 will obviously give you low-light performance and a much lighter lens. On the K20D, the 50mm is not as impressive as it performs on lower-megapixel sensors. The 35-105 at 50 mm is more than adequate at all apertures - however, at 35-45mm wide open it is fairly weak (but good by f/5.6). From what I have read, all the newer 50mm f/1.4 designs - even the next generation 'A's are very good in resolution all the way to at least f/2.0; however, the m version probably does not out-resolve the 35-105 by much at all. By about 70mm and beyond, the 35-105 is quite amazing. Even if the resolution might not be quite up to the newest designs - the look is very much Pentax in all the good ways. As such, the lens is hard to beat for portraits.


Last edited by ScooterMaxi Jim; 03-29-2010 at 07:07 PM. Reason: words left out
03-29-2010, 10:06 PM   #5
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Richmond, VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 86
Original Poster
Here's an example with the 50 1.4 M. I believe this was wide open.
Attached Images
 
03-30-2010, 06:17 AM   #6
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
this has nothng to do with ghosting but simple flare from shooting directly into bright lights IMO

any lens can do this.

Are you concerned about reflection off the sensor due to the back element?

the best way to see that is to shoot a uniform surface.

the shot below is a rikenon 135mmF2.8 screw mount. It has a flat rear element, which I believe is the cause of the problem. Note that out of 11 M42 lenses, including tamron, vivitar, tele-lentar, and several varients of pentax from preset to SMC, this is the only lens I have an issue with.

for K and KA mount lenses, where I have 13 different lenses, again ranging from vivitar (kiron and Komine), tamron, samyang, and SMC-Pentax I have no problems.

In my 6 AF lenses from sigma, SMC-FA, SMC-FAJ, and tamron, I only have that actually have digital coatings on the rear elements. Again no issue with any of them.

As someone else stated, the issue is grossly over stated as a problem.

See this link for other lenses with the problem, Mine was serious enough that I went out and bought another M42 135mm lens. as it took place at all apertures in almost all shots (oddly enough, when using flash it was no issue), but the issue goes away when I add a MC teleconverter

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-beginners-corner-q/90280-what-why.html
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Lowell Goudge; 03-30-2010 at 07:52 AM.
03-30-2010, 07:36 AM   #7
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Richmond, VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 86
Original Poster
This is admittedly a rather extreme example. And how otherwise flair resistant this lens is may exaggerate the effect.
Here is another from the same shoot -- a kind of Halloween dinner theater. I was trying to use the candles on the table to draw the eye to the stage. But as you can see, the reflections showed up in the shadows on stage? What's the best way for correcting the PP. I was thinking of layering the globs and dialing out the dominant color.

Last edited by c a sugg; 03-30-2010 at 07:47 AM. Reason: correct punctuation
03-30-2010, 07:45 AM   #8
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Richmond, VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 86
Original Poster
Ooops, It seems that I posted that image to another discussion a few months ago.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-beginners-corner-q/80131-why-penta...f-1-4-a-2.html

03-30-2010, 07:51 AM   #9
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
QuoteOriginally posted by c a sugg Quote
Ooops, It seems that I posted that image to another discussion a few months ago.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-beginners-corner-q/80131-why-penta...f-1-4-a-2.html
I used the make over tool in PSP X3 (blemish remover) to clean them out of the linked photo.

Just another thought, this is possibly due to a front end filter not the reflections off the sensor. Have you looked into what you have for a filter. You may be picking on the wrong subject, as this does not seem to be the same as all posted shots I have seen with sensor reflection
03-30-2010, 09:22 AM   #10
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Richmond, VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 86
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I used the make over tool in PSP X3 (blemish remover) to clean them out of the linked photo.

Just another thought, this is possibly due to a front end filter not the reflections off the sensor. Have you looked into what you have for a filter. You may be picking on the wrong subject, as this does not seem to be the same as all posted shots I have seen with sensor reflection
It's a Hoya skylight filter. I'll have to try going without one in a similar situation. Formerly I would have shot scenes like this on B&W film, so it might not have been as noticable.
BTW, how is PSP X3? I've just started using X2 Ultimate. Opinions I've seen are mixed. But the file browsing improvements, if they actually are, sound enticing, especially as I would like to work from raw as much a possible.
03-30-2010, 09:28 AM   #11
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
QuoteOriginally posted by c a sugg Quote
It's a Hoya skylight filter. I'll have to try going without one in a similar situation. Formerly I would have shot scenes like this on B&W film, so it might not have been as noticable.
BTW, how is PSP X3? I've just started using X2 Ultimate. Opinions I've seen are mixed. But the file browsing improvements, if they actually are, sound enticing, especially as I would like to work from raw as much a possible.
re PSP X3

I have migrated from version 8 to X, XI, X2, X2 Ultimate and now X3

What I can tell you is that with respect to the browser, it is a semi separate function, you can select browser mode or editor mode but you no longer display the browser as either a bar at the bottom or a separate window in the workspace.

It does take a little time to shift between the two and to get used to it but it is really better now IMO

raw processing now allows you to set the processing settings on opening an image which is much imporved over X2.

The other thing is thet X2 Ultimate did not support the K7.

for raw support X3 would be the way to go if you stay within PSP.

The other thing is it seems (not sure this is fully true yet) to be more stable. I could get all other versions to crash if I did a large number of open file, crop image, save file operations in sequence. I have not had that issue yet with X3
04-15-2010, 12:05 AM   #12
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Richmond, VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 86
Original Poster
follow-up

Managed to get my hands on a mechanically and optically pristine SMC-A 35 - 105. So far the reputation seems to be deserved. I'd call it "nice and sharp" rather than "poke your eyes out." Really pleasant rendering.
Secondly, it does seem that the filters were the problem in terms of ghosting. So it looks like it's back to lens caps.
I also sprung for a KatzEye screen. Rather pricey, but I instantly found, well worth it.
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, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SMC 105mm F2.8 vs SMC-M 100mm F2.8 Lowell Goudge Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 12-09-2015 03:56 PM
K-x: ghosting in image pentaxpup Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 12-14-2009 05:26 AM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma Macro 105mm F2.8 EX DG for Pentax Digital SLR mmzymxf Sold Items 4 10-11-2008 07:13 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:56 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