Lenses now considered retired by K-5

Jasvox · 11-20-2010, 12:20 AM

I think if there was a chance of the K-5 rendering inferior glass obsolete, they wouldn't pair it with the DA 18-55 as a kit. I seem to remember this resolution theory also coming to topic when the K20D was released, but that topic passed rather quickly. I think there may be some minute differences in the handling of resolution, but not enough to think the K-5 is some bionic camera body which renders mere mortal glass useless. I am not sure about you, but the idea of a camera body which wont handle properly the legacy lenses from yesteryear doesn't sound very attractive to me.

Jason

kevinschoenmakers · 11-20-2010, 12:25 AM

The logic is flawed to begin with.

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 11-20-2010, 12:26 AM

...and the price for the most unnecessary thread goes to...

TOUGEFC · 11-20-2010, 12:57 AM

I only started this thread as im curious to see which lenses some k-5 owners have been claiming to be not so sharp on the k-5.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 11-20-2010, 01:20 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Ok i dont have a K-5 yet

but im reading in alot of threads that many owners of the K-5 are noting that certain lenses are now not so good and not sharp anymore on the K-5 because the K-5 res is over- resloving them.

With more megapixels comes more responsibility to keep the camera steady.

lexurian · 11-20-2010, 01:48 AM

I've heard that 'sensor out-resolving the glass' meme bandied about too and would like it explained in terms I understand. I can't say I pay much heed to it, and BTW have much admired for quite a while this flickr user's poetic combination of Pentax K-7 and now K-5 and old Ziess and Takumar lenses. - If this is what old lenses can do on new Pentax bodies I definitely want some of that!

Flickr: onigiri-kun's Photostream

Jasvox · 11-20-2010, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by lexurian

I've heard that 'sensor out-resolving the glass' meme bandied about too and would like it explained in terms I understand. I can't say I pay much heed to it, and BTW have much admired for quite a while this flickr user's poetic combination of Pentax K-7 and now K-5 and old Ziess and Takumar lenses. - If this is what old lenses can do on new Pentax bodies I definitely want some of that!

Flickr: onigiri-kun's Photostream

Technique and skills "out-resolve" anything else.

Jason

Raybo · 11-20-2010, 02:02 AM

Okee dokee.........................How much is my MIJ FA43 worth now-a-days?

---------- Post added 11-20-10 at 03:09 AM ----------

BTW, should I worry about my DA* 300 or any of other DA or third party lenses?.........Damn it!

pinholecam · 11-20-2010, 02:53 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

no it isn't the most important factor, but for those upgrading from the K10 it is.

Originally posted by Abstract

No what I meant is if its gonna give me worse quality shots based on the fact that its picky with not as good lenses or older lenses(Which is what I will mainly use, 70,80,90's era). Would it be worth it is my point if I am not using top of the line newer lenses...?

My outfit for a while will consist of just the kit lens and a Pentax M 50mm 1.4 and Vivitar 70-210 series 1 3.5...

Lol,
Another reason for ppl to stick to their *istD, K200D and K10?

We already have the 'a K5 is soft' nonsense going about as an excuse not to upgrade.

I have loads of old manual lenses. Perhaps 75% of my lens collection.
I've not had a chance to go through all of them yet, but I must say that those I have tried looks good so far. In a way, by extension to the lineage of these lenses, many of the reputed Pentax lenses should be fine as well.

1. Revuenon 55/1.2 -ok; So the good Pentax 50/1.2 should be fine as well
2. K24/2.8 - Still fantastic!
3. K135/2.5 - Yup! still great.
4. A50/1.4 and f2 - Fine
5. FA135, 85, 35, 43 - All great as they are

The ones that I may need to have my fingers crossed may be the less famous lenses from Pentax and the 3rd party ones, but I'll get to them in time.
I'm certainly optimistic about them though.

Manel Brand · 11-20-2010, 03:31 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Im curious to know what lenses are not up to standard on the K-5...

The same that are not up to your K200. Any lens that is good with your actual camera will be even better with the K-5. Those older lens (K to FA) were made to work with 35mm cameras; if you do the math, it takes about 25 mega-pixels to simulate 35mm film, which is still far more than any digital camera available this days. However, some may argue that a lens made for film doesn't perform very well with digital sensors, but I did not find evidence of this to be true in my experience.

**Rorschach** · 11-20-2010, 04:01 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

no it isn't the most important factor, but for those upgrading from the K10 it is.

Wrong. That is the least important thing.

TOUGEFC · 11-20-2010, 04:01 AM

Yes i agree, but the ive read owners of the k-5 have been noting that some of there lenses that are sharp on their previous bodies are not not so good mounted on their new cameras.
Im just trying to get to the bottom of it all...

JohnBee · 11-20-2010, 04:12 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Ok i dont have a K-5 yet

but im reading in alot of threads that many owners of the K-5 are noting that certain lenses are now not so good and not sharp anymore on the K-5 because the K-5 res is over- resloving them.

Could the owners start posting what lenses they are now considering "retiring" since having the K-5.

Im curious to know what lenses are not up to standard on the K-5...

That makes no sense whatsoever.
I shoot old(antique even) M42 glass on a FF and they look twice as good as they do on my K20D.

I think this is yet another urban legend that is in need of addressing.
And by addressing I don't mean attacking or calling people names for setting-up tests and investigating this further...

TOUGEFC · 11-20-2010, 04:20 AM

For the record, im not claiming it to be true and nor do i believe it. And i dont want to name names, Im just pointing out observations when reading several posts made by various k-5 owners saying that some of their lenses arnt looking so good on their new camera's. And would like them to speak up about these findings with the lenses.

Manel Brand · 11-20-2010, 04:31 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

For the record, im not claiming it to be true and nor do i believe it. And i dont want to name names, Im just pointing out observations when reading several posts made by various k-5 owners saying that some of their lenses arnt looking so good on their new camera's. And would like them to speak up about these findings with the lenses.

It's Ok, even if you were. No big deal.

11-20-2010, 12:20 AM	#16
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	hype/hogwash I think if there was a chance of the K-5 rendering inferior glass obsolete, they wouldn't pair it with the DA 18-55 as a kit. I seem to remember this resolution theory also coming to topic when the K20D was released, but that topic passed rather quickly. I think there may be some minute differences in the handling of resolution, but not enough to think the K-5 is some bionic camera body which renders mere mortal glass useless. I am not sure about you, but the idea of a camera body which wont handle properly the legacy lenses from yesteryear doesn't sound very attractive to me. Jason

11-20-2010, 02:53 AM	#24
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,709	Originally posted by Digitalis no it isn't the most important factor, but for those upgrading from the K10 it is. Originally posted by Abstract No what I meant is if its gonna give me worse quality shots based on the fact that its picky with not as good lenses or older lenses(Which is what I will mainly use, 70,80,90's era). Would it be worth it is my point if I am not using top of the line newer lenses...? My outfit for a while will consist of just the kit lens and a Pentax M 50mm 1.4 and Vivitar 70-210 series 1 3.5... Lol, Another reason for ppl to stick to their istD, K200D and K10? We already have the 'a K5 is soft' nonsense going about as an excuse not to upgrade. I have loads of old manual lenses. Perhaps 75% of my lens collection. I've not had a chance to go through all of them yet, but I must say that those I have tried looks good so far. In a way, by extension to the lineage of these lenses, many of the reputed Pentax lenses should be fine as well. 1. Revuenon 55/1.2 -ok; So the good Pentax 50/1.2 should be fine as well 2. K24/2.8 - Still fantastic! 3. K135/2.5 - Yup! still great. 4. A50/1.4 and f2 - Fine 5. FA135, 85, 35, 43 - All great as they are The ones that I may need to have my fingers crossed may be the less famous lenses from Pentax and the 3rd party ones, but I'll get to them in time. I'm certainly optimistic about them though. Last edited by pinholecam; 11-20-2010 at 04:35 AM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
retired packard	trev99	Monthly Photo Contests	0	03-03-2010 05:12 PM
A Retired USMC Captain (First portrait on the street)	metroeloise	Post Your Photos!	16	08-28-2009 06:59 PM
Retired Rail Switcher	areidjr	Post Your Photos!	13	09-23-2007 05:59 AM
Retired Warriors.	NLAlston	Post Your Photos!	4	05-27-2007 10:00 PM
*istDS is now retired - last images	flash1100	Post Your Photos!	3	01-25-2007 03:01 PM

11-20-2010, 12:25 AM	#17
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509	The logic is flawed to begin with.

11-20-2010, 12:26 AM	#18
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	...and the price for the most unnecessary thread goes to...

11-20-2010, 12:57 AM	#19
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561 Original Poster	I only started this thread as im curious to see which lenses some k-5 owners have been claiming to be not so sharp on the k-5.

11-20-2010, 01:20 AM	#20
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Ok i dont have a K-5 yet but im reading in alot of threads that many owners of the K-5 are noting that certain lenses are now not so good and not sharp anymore on the K-5 because the K-5 res is over- resloving them. With more megapixels comes more responsibility to keep the camera steady.

11-20-2010, 01:48 AM	#21
lexurian New Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Glasgow Posts: 10	I've heard that 'sensor out-resolving the glass' meme bandied about too and would like it explained in terms I understand. I can't say I pay much heed to it, and BTW have much admired for quite a while this flickr user's poetic combination of Pentax K-7 and now K-5 and old Ziess and Takumar lenses. - If this is what old lenses can do on new Pentax bodies I definitely want some of that! Flickr: onigiri-kun's Photostream

11-20-2010, 02:00 AM	#22
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	Originally posted by lexurian I've heard that 'sensor out-resolving the glass' meme bandied about too and would like it explained in terms I understand. I can't say I pay much heed to it, and BTW have much admired for quite a while this flickr user's poetic combination of Pentax K-7 and now K-5 and old Ziess and Takumar lenses. - If this is what old lenses can do on new Pentax bodies I definitely want some of that! Flickr: onigiri-kun's Photostream Technique and skills "out-resolve" anything else. Jason

11-20-2010, 02:02 AM	#23
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Okee dokee.........................How much is my MIJ FA43 worth now-a-days? ---------- Post added 11-20-10 at 03:09 AM ---------- BTW, should I worry about my DA* 300 or any of other DA or third party lenses?.........Damn it!

11-20-2010, 03:31 AM	#25
Manel Brand Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Porto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 853	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Im curious to know what lenses are not up to standard on the K-5... The same that are not up to your K200. Any lens that is good with your actual camera will be even better with the K-5. Those older lens (K to FA) were made to work with 35mm cameras; if you do the math, it takes about 25 mega-pixels to simulate 35mm film, which is still far more than any digital camera available this days. However, some may argue that a lens made for film doesn't perform very well with digital sensors, but I did not find evidence of this to be true in my experience.

11-20-2010, 04:01 AM	#26
Rorschach Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Kuusamo, Finland Photos: Gallery Posts: 652	Originally posted by Digitalis no it isn't the most important factor, but for those upgrading from the K10 it is. Wrong. That is the least important thing.

11-20-2010, 04:01 AM	#27
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561 Original Poster	Yes i agree, but the ive read owners of the k-5 have been noting that some of there lenses that are sharp on their previous bodies are not not so good mounted on their new cameras. Im just trying to get to the bottom of it all...

11-20-2010, 04:12 AM	#28
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Ok i dont have a K-5 yet but im reading in alot of threads that many owners of the K-5 are noting that certain lenses are now not so good and not sharp anymore on the K-5 because the K-5 res is over- resloving them. Could the owners start posting what lenses they are now considering "retiring" since having the K-5. Im curious to know what lenses are not up to standard on the K-5... That makes no sense whatsoever. I shoot old(antique even) M42 glass on a FF and they look twice as good as they do on my K20D. I think this is yet another urban legend that is in need of addressing. And by addressing I don't mean attacking or calling people names for setting-up tests and investigating this further...

11-20-2010, 04:20 AM	#29
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561 Original Poster	For the record, im not claiming it to be true and nor do i believe it. And i dont want to name names, Im just pointing out observations when reading several posts made by various k-5 owners saying that some of their lenses arnt looking so good on their new camera's. And would like them to speak up about these findings with the lenses.

11-20-2010, 04:31 AM	#30
Manel Brand Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Porto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 853	Originally posted by TOUGEFC For the record, im not claiming it to be true and nor do i believe it. And i dont want to name names, Im just pointing out observations when reading several posts made by various k-5 owners saying that some of their lenses arnt looking so good on their new camera's. And would like them to speak up about these findings with the lenses. It's Ok, even if you were. No big deal.