Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-21-2010, 01:05 AM   #1
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
FA24mm/2 is really weak at K-5, need good DNG from users of K-5 + FA*24

http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/565942.jpg

I've download DNG from K-5's review.
Pentax K-5 Review - PentaxForums.com Professional Reviews
Index of /content/k5review/raw


It's ISO100 file. ISO80 is much worse.
Converted in LR 3.2.
ALL NR is set to ZERO. Sharpness 40@0.8. Details 35.

It's f8 and it's really weak result for me.

And I don't understand where is the focus point? The right wall of building and the lower part of road are sharper than left and central part of photo.


Last edited by ogl; 11-21-2010 at 02:05 AM.
11-21-2010, 01:16 AM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,987
Indeed it looks like there are some aberrations here and there. This particular shot was hand-held, but as I didn't shoot it, I don't know where the focal point is.

The FA* 24mm hasn't gotten much praise compared to other FA* lenses. Maybe that's because its resolution just isn't good enough on digital? It's starting to sound like resolution is becoming a big deal with older wide-angle lenses.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

11-21-2010, 01:33 AM   #3
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Indeed it looks like there are some aberrations here and there. This particular shot was hand-held, but as I didn't shoot it, I don't know where the focal point is.

The FA* 24mm hasn't gotten much praise compared to other FA* lenses. Maybe that's because its resolution just isn't good enough on digital? It's starting to sound like resolution is becoming a big deal with older wide-angle lenses.
Let's compare with K200D at f8.
http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/565946.jpg
http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/565947.jpg
http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/565948.jpg
11-21-2010, 01:40 AM   #4
Veteran Member
Jasvox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,110
Correct me if I am wrong.

The comparison is with 2 different lenses, shot by 2 different bodies, and 2 different subjects. In my mind, that isn't at all a benchmark for comparing how well an FA24 performs on the K-5, or any other body. To indeed test more accurately, the comparisons should be made using the very same lens, shooting the exact same subject under the exact same light. But even then, all we will be able to determine are the results of that very lens and not every FA24 or as a whole.

Jason

11-21-2010, 02:02 AM   #5
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Jasvox Quote
Correct me if I am wrong.

The comparison is with 2 different lenses, shot by 2 different bodies, and 2 different subjects. In my mind, that isn't at all a benchmark for comparing how well an FA24 performs on the K-5, or any other body. To indeed test more accurately, the comparisons should be made using the very same lens, shooting the exact same subject under the exact same light. But even then, all we will be able to determine are the results of that very lens and not every FA24 or as a whole.

Jason
Dear Jason....I say about what my eyes see and nothing else. It's just my impression.

I don't care benchmarks and test. I see real life photos.
FA*24 is worse at K-5 than at K200D. It's all. Maybe FA*24 of reviewer is wrong...I don't know.

You are a bit wrong. The wood is VERY complex object and good lens offers very good resolution and details of wood. The first object from review is more simple for FA*24.
11-21-2010, 02:02 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Manel Brand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Porto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 854
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
I don't understand where is the focus point? The right wall of building and the lower part of road are sharper than left and central part of photo.
Perhaps there isn't one in particular; furthermore, it's a tricky shot because of the high contrast of the scene, potential foliage movement and (somehow) awkward perspective, with multiple focal planes; in addition to that, Adam has stated that it was a hand-held shot which may explain some lack of definition on the left side of the image.

While I was writing down this you have posted some photos but you have to agree that they are much less demanding in terms of focal point variation, hence the better results.

Just a side note: personally, although I don't have the lens in question, I don't find wide angle lens that good for this type of photography; people generally say that wides are good for landscape and scenery but I don't find them so adequate (only use them for close-ups, macros and occasionally architectural shots). If I need a wide perspective, I would go for a pano with a 50mm lens and stitch two or three shots in PP with much better results.
11-21-2010, 02:06 AM   #7
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Manel Brand Quote
Perhaps there isn't one in particular; furthermore, it's a tricky shot because of the high contrast of the scene, potential foliage movement and (somehow) awkward perspective, with multiple focal planes; in addition to that, Adam has stated that it was a hand-held shot which may explain some lack of definition on the left side of the image.
Why did they make review with bad samples?

Anyway, I ask K-5 + FA*24/2 users about good DNG samples.
11-21-2010, 02:10 AM   #8
Senior Member
eccentricphotography's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 169
The better the sensors get, the more glaring a lens weakness.

11-21-2010, 02:11 AM   #9
Veteran Member
Manel Brand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Porto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 854
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Why did they make review with bad samples?

Anyway, I ask K-5 + FA*24/2 users about good DNG samples.
It happens all the time. They should know better; Pixel peeping it's in the order this days.

Oh, excuse me... I didn't notice that?
11-21-2010, 02:12 AM   #10
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,987
QuoteOriginally posted by Jasvox Quote
Correct me if I am wrong.

The comparison is with 2 different lenses, shot by 2 different bodies, and 2 different subjects. In my mind, that isn't at all a benchmark for comparing how well an FA24 performs on the K-5, or any other body. To indeed test more accurately, the comparisons should be made using the very same lens, shooting the exact same subject under the exact same light. But even then, all we will be able to determine are the results of that very lens and not every FA24 or as a whole.

Jason
Right- the only thing that test shot was getting at is the dynamic range at ISO 80. Can't jump to conclusions based on one bad photo.

I have a whole folder of pics taken with the 24mm, so maybe I can throw a few more up tomorrow.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

11-21-2010, 02:33 AM   #11
Pentaxian
Arpe's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,331
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
I don't care benchmarks and test. I see real life photos.
And those photos you see, you are using as a benchmark to make your remarks about the lens. Whenever you judge a lens you are using a benchmark, like it or not. Are you not testing it when you take a photo then look closely at it and complain?
11-21-2010, 04:06 AM   #12
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Right- the only thing that test shot was getting at is the dynamic range at ISO 80. Can't jump to conclusions based on one bad photo.

I have a whole folder of pics taken with the 24mm, so maybe I can throw a few more up tomorrow.
Two photos. ISO80 and ISO100.
ISO80 - f8 and 1/60.
ISO100 - f8 and 1/90. I doubt that camera has any shutter blur...Or???

I'd like to understand what I can expect...I'd like to buy K-5...
FA77 + K-5's I've seen before were sharp.
FA*24 is no good at all. I'd like to understand - focus or lens problem...?
11-21-2010, 04:11 AM   #13
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Arpe Quote
And those photos you see, you are using as a benchmark to make your remarks about the lens. Whenever you judge a lens you are using a benchmark, like it or not. Are you not testing it when you take a photo then look closely at it and complain?
is it prohibited to think and trying to understand why FA*24 is weak at K-5?
is it not free forum?
11-21-2010, 07:11 AM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 499
The FA24 is just as capable as it ever was, but no lens has infinite resolution. The K200D shots posted here show similar performance to the one from the first post, but the resolution being over a third lower, the images look sharper. Even very highly rated lenses will show flaws at 16MP, especially near the corners.
11-21-2010, 10:57 AM   #15
Senior Member
hegedus's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 139
In my opinion there is something very wrong with this photo - it is either lens or the body missed focus, or something third. I think that the resolution can't be accused for the bad picture in this case, because FA 24mm is a full frame lens, and it should be capable of much larger sensor at higher resolution.
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!
camera, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5, review
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I Am Weak... (LBA) ajuett Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 26 04-02-2010 12:46 AM
Two hunters in the sand ... not for you weak hearted Rense Post Your Photos! 13 08-13-2009 11:41 AM
too weak? not worth it? kewpie-o Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 7 07-31-2009 01:18 PM
I am so weak... need help!!! ACImages Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 01-03-2008 02:24 AM
please critique my work. what's strong, what's weak? konraDarnok Post Your Photos! 2 11-02-2007 02:53 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:26 PM. | 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