Back in '85 (?) I dug very deep and bought Pentax's new 100mm f:2.8 macro, which became my go-to lens for everything.
Taking it to the tropics, it got fungus, and was cleaned, and got fungus, and was cleaned, and got fung........, etc.
And has it been dropped a time or two???

With my digital cameras, I have had problems getting perfect focus with it. Especially the K10D.
But how to justify buying a new version of an excellent lens that a person already owns???

Well, I got the new lens!
I put it on the K10 and shot some flowers at sunset. ISO 400 and 800. Aperture variable. Shutter variable.
Just sharing a few shots, un-retouched from camera's side-car JPGs.

I think the softness we see here, has to do with the K10's native resolution, not with the focus. Whatever the case, it shows much better than before!
Inviting comments, and also inviting folks to enjoy along with me.
Angky.

[MikeNArk]

Looks like you have a new tool in your kit. You may be right about the K-10's resolution, however it doesn't seem to detract from the photos. I rather like the colors and relative softness of the flower images and believe it captures pretty good detail in the insect and cactus captures. Looking forward to more shots from you and this lens.
Mike

[phx.david]

I love that lens. Works really great for portraits as well. These are some nice shots.

[angkymac]

Looks like you have a new tool in your kit. You may be right about the K-10's resolution, however it doesn't seem to detract from the photos. I rather like the colors and relative softness of the flower images and believe it captures pretty good detail in the insect and cactus captures. Looking forward to more shots from you and this lens.
Mike

Yes, it is a sort of +1 and -1 in these shots; it's a plus 1 for soft appeal on the flowers, and minus 1 for loss of minutely tiny detail.
I'll put this lens on the K1 and see what it does. I surely do like the way it handles!
Thanks for your affirmation, and I'll get some more shots with it posted pretty soon.
Angky.

---------- Post added 11-20-21 at 11:09 PM ----------

I love that lens. Works really great for portraits as well. These are some nice shots.

Yes, I seem to recall you doing some great things with this lens.
I love how it handles. All the good points of its old predecessor, with the added benefit of being lighter and smaller.
And the fact that I can actually use the in-camera aperture control is huge!
I still like to manually focus it, because, like its predecessor, that focus ring is so precise and so easy to use, with the viewfinder image extremely bright and sharp.
(And the auto-focus is a long way from the DA 55-300 PLM! )
Appreciate your comment on the images.
Angky.

[eaglem]

Very nice indeed good Macro shots.

[mlag]

Yes, it is a sort of +1 and -1 in these shots; it's a plus 1 for soft appeal on the flowers, and minus 1 for loss of minutely tiny detail.
I'll put this lens on the K1 and see what it does. I surely do like the way it handles!
Thanks for your affirmation, and I'll get some more shots with it posted pretty soon.
Angky.

Apparently you own a K10 and a K1.
But you test the new lens first on the older camera...
I would rather put it first to the test on newer camera - my case it would be the K3II over the K10, so I was wondering why the K10 first?

[angkymac]

Very nice indeed good Macro shots.

Thank you, EM!
I'll work on improving them as time goes by, now that I finally have some control over the macro lens.
Angky.

---------- Post added 11-21-21 at 08:33 PM ----------

Apparently you own a K10 and a K1.
But you test the new lens first on the older camera...
I would rather put it first to the test on newer camera - my case it would be the K3II over the K10, so I was wondering why the K10 first?

Yes, you are correct; I do have both the K10 and the K1.
And I understand your curiosity about my choice to use the K10 first. I'll try to explain--
I think it centers on a matter of "feelings". I feel some kind of attachment to the K10--from owning it for so many years. So I want it to be successful!
But also, I wanted to see if this new lens would correct the K10 problem with my macro lens; I'm pretty sure it will work well with the K1, so not yet any need to test that one.
There is another reason, as well. I would rather shoot the K10 on flowers and macro things than the K1. The K1 is set up for my preferences in landscape type shooting. The K10 is much lighter and easier to handle when walking around my neighborhood shooting flowers in people's yards. And I really like the color rendition of the CCD sensor in the K10. So I tested the lens--well, actually, I tested the camera with that lens. And I knew that if it failed, I was looking at replacing that APS-C camera with a newer APS-C camera. (I want to keep an APS-C machine.)
So it was just a personal thing--nothing that can be applied to general photography. And I shared it on this site because several folks on the site share their interesting things just to share them. Pretty nice folks, a lot of them.
Lengthy answer I gave you, but thanks for asking!
Angky.

[mlag]

Yes, you are correct; I do have both the K10 and the K1.
And I understand your curiosity about my choice to use the K10 first. I'll try to explain--
I think it centers on a matter of "feelings". I feel some kind of attachment to the K10--from owning it for so many years. So I want it to be successful!
But also, I wanted to see if this new lens would correct the K10 problem with my macro lens; I'm pretty sure it will work well with the K1, so not yet any need to test that one.
There is another reason, as well. I would rather shoot the K10 on flowers and macro things than the K1. The K1 is set up for my preferences in landscape type shooting. The K10 is much lighter and easier to handle when walking around my neighborhood shooting flowers in people's yards. And I really like the color rendition of the CCD sensor in the K10. So I tested the lens--well, actually, I tested the camera with that lens. And I knew that if it failed, I was looking at replacing that APS-C camera with a newer APS-C camera. (I want to keep an APS-C machine.)
So it was just a personal thing--nothing that can be applied to general photography. And I shared it on this site because several folks on the site share their interesting things just to share them. Pretty nice folks, a lot of them.
Lengthy answer I gave you, but thanks for asking!
Angky.

Thanks for answering. I was curious for two reasons, I have always perceived my K3II as the replacement of my K10 (which sits on a shelve now, should still work....) and I did some (my first!) macro shots (flowers&butterflies) this summer, so your post triggered my attention. I have seen more posts of K10 lovers, so i am always a bit wondering why...? I was thinking, maybe a macro thing? So I asked...

I started with an SFX (film) camera, always been happy to jump to the newer body (K10 &K3II). Personally, about color rendering, I find myself using the K3II at typically -0,5 or 0,7 EV or so and like the color rendering performance better by doing so (one could say : i think the camera overexposes a bit, but despite all possible postprocessing tools for exposure , i have always found it improves color in underexposing a tiny bit - don't have a good explanation for this). I also like the APSc format - i guess i got used to the extra range/cropfactor and the way it works out in my photography, so was not tempted to go for the K1.

[angkymac]

Thanks for answering. I was curious for two reasons, I have always perceived my K3II as the replacement of my K10 (which sits on a shelve now, should still work....) and I did some (my first!) macro shots (flowers&butterflies) this summer, so your post triggered my attention. I have seen more posts of K10 lovers, so i am always a bit wondering why...? I was thinking, maybe a macro thing? So I asked...

I started with an SFX (film) camera, always been happy to jump to the newer body (K10 &K3II). Personally, about color rendering, I find myself using the K3II at typically -0,5 or 0,7 EV or so and like the color rendering performance better by doing so (one could say : i think the camera overexposes a bit, but despite all possible postprocessing tools for exposure , i have always found it improves color in underexposing a tiny bit - don't have a good explanation for this). I also like the APSc format - i guess i got used to the extra range/cropfactor and the way it works out in my photography, so was not tempted to go for the K1.

Yes, your story fits a lot of folks.
Regarding the K10 for macro, as you wondered, it is not really anything of importance about that camera. It's just that I like to handle it when I'm struggling in an awkward position to get a macro shot. The K1 is just too heavy and bulky for some shots. And then, there is the crop factor that makes a macro shot easier to compose (for me).
The K10 is, I think, the last Pentax camera with the CCD sensor (except for their 645N?). And that CCD sensor does some interesting color renditions--more vivid, it seems to me. So I like that for floral images.
I also underexpose slightly. It's a holdover from film days working with slides where it increases the density (enhancing the color). Now I can't get my eyes to adjust to a normally exposed digital image; it seems too washed out. But there is also the fact that the K1 has an astonishing ability to handle under-exposed images (or sections thereof). I can underexpose 3 or 4 stops and still get wonderful data out of that area. If I blow out a highlight, which is easy to do, I can't get anything out of it. So I have learned to underexpose slightly.
Just my perspective on things--if it has any value.
Angky.

[Sailor]

Very enjoyable series. Nice work.

Jer

[angkymac]

Very enjoyable series. Nice work.

Jer

Well, thank you much!
Glad to know it was of value to you.
Angky.