The M Club!

simbon4o · 03-23-2011, 10:28 AM

Yes! The sheeps and the morning light through the trees - perfect for shooting!

thecozmiester · 03-24-2011, 02:15 PM

50mm f2

wehavenowaves! · 03-24-2011, 07:36 PM

just got my M 35/2.8 about two weeks ago. havent shot with it much but here is one of my friend at the taco joint in seoul!!! no idea what aperture but it was pretty wide.

**paulh** · 03-26-2011, 06:53 AM

Another shot from the farm with the M50 1.7:

**burzum** · 03-27-2011, 12:21 AM

Few from M28 f2.8

**burzum** · 03-27-2011, 12:23 AM

Few more :-)

womble · 03-27-2011, 01:37 AM

One more sheep shot. This one is proving very popular on Flickr! Pentax K20D and SMC Pentax-M 100mm f/2.8 lens.

Best wishes, Kris.

Marc Sabatella · 03-27-2011, 08:36 AM

Here's a few shots where I was really happy to have the new M120/2.8. It's a venue I've never shot in before - an old hotel. No stage lights, so I'm really pushing things in terms of ISO and shutter speed.

The extra reach over the M100/2.8 got me better framing / more detail on the clarinetist and drummer, and the extra half stop or so over the M135/3.5 was pretty much the difference between usable and unusable in terms of noise and blur (yes, some day, a K-5-class camera upgrade is what I'd want). Also, the fact that it's just that much wider than the 135 helped - the guitarist shot would not have worked with a 135 from the vantage point I used for that shot (leaning against a pole). I also took a couple with my DA70 from that spot, but neither turned out to be usable.

Jonathan Mac · 03-27-2011, 09:25 AM

A couple from January with my newest M - the 50mm f/1.4

eddie1960 · 03-27-2011, 09:43 AM

a few from last saturday afternoon using the m 50 f1.7. mostly between 1.7-2.8. Ronnie Hayward and friends

**paulh** · 03-27-2011, 10:00 AM

Some nice work posted here lately - Eddie & Marc, really like the musician shots - beautiful!

**Lowell Goudge** · 03-27-2011, 10:56 AM

I used to think that M's were inferior to K lenses, based upon a few side by side comparisons of the K50F1.4 to M50F2 and the K105F2.8 to the K100F2.8 where I fent there was some definite difference in teh"feel" of the lens.

I know, for someone who measurbates, not really a scientific measure is it.

BUT.

I filled a hole this weekend in my K mount MF lens kit by adding a pristine example of the M35F2.

None of the complaints I previously had about the M series were present. focusing was silky smooth, and the lens is very very sharp.

I know this is just a quick test shot, and normally people get bored of cats, but...

The shame is that it looks so much better before it is re-sized

This is a great little addition to my kit. My only other M lens is also a good one, the 100F4 macro

eddie1960 · 03-27-2011, 10:58 AM

Thanks Paul, Musicians are usually great subjects

no music yesterday
an Alternate from yesterdays Single in march shots m50 f1.7 @ 1.7

Marc Sabatella · 03-27-2011, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I used to think that M's were inferior to K lenses, based upon a few side by side comparisons of the K50F1.4 to M50F2 and the K105F2.8 to the K100F2.8 where I fent there was some definite difference in teh"feel" of the lens.

Of course, to be fair, the K50/1.4 *should* be a nicer lens than the M50/2, just based on what I assume they originally cost.

But I'm glad to hear the M35/2 measures up. I don't have a need for such a lens myself, but I've always thought that this made a lot of sense as a first (or second, after the ubiquitous 50) prime for most people.

I for one have no problem with cat shots, and that's a nice one!

**Lowell Goudge** · 03-27-2011, 12:36 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

Of course, to be fair, the K50/1.4 *should* be a nicer lens than the M50/2, just based on what I assume they originally cost.

But I'm glad to hear the M35/2 measures up. I don't have a need for such a lens myself, but I've always thought that this made a lot of sense as a first (or second, after the ubiquitous 50) prime for most people.

I for one have no problem with cat shots, and that's a nice one!

Thanks Marc

Re the difference between the K and M it is (or was previously) not optics but mechanics. The other Ms I tried just seemed to be lacking the same silky smooth feel. They all seemed a little rough by comparison, but maybe when you consider my K lenses 50/1.4, 135/2.5, 300/4 I was unfairly comparing some really great lenses and expecting a "kit lens" to be the same

03-24-2011, 07:36 PM	#2418
wehavenowaves! Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Seoul Posts: 98	just got my M 35/2.8 about two weeks ago. havent shot with it much but here is one of my friend at the taco joint in seoul!!! no idea what aperture but it was pretty wide. Last edited by wehavenowaves!; 07-10-2012 at 05:40 AM.

03-27-2011, 09:25 AM	#2424
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,897	A couple from January with my newest M - the 50mm f/1.4 Last edited by Jonathan Mac; 03-27-2011 at 09:30 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The A Club	jake.astig	Lens Clubs	3997	1 Day Ago 08:15 AM
The F Club!	jsherman999	Lens Clubs	1237	6 Days Ago 04:04 PM
D-FA WR Club	Rico	Lens Clubs	671	03-10-2024 03:17 AM
Ltd club, here I come	axl	Lens Clubs	21	12-12-2010 03:06 AM
In the club again	metroeloise	Post Your Photos!	4	10-20-2008 08:59 AM

03-23-2011, 10:28 AM	#2416
simbon4o Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 258	Yes! The sheeps and the morning light through the trees - perfect for shooting!

03-24-2011, 02:15 PM	#2417
thecozmiester New Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 20	50mm f2

03-26-2011, 06:53 AM	#2419
paulh Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: DFW Texas/Ventura County, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 33,262	Another shot from the farm with the M50 1.7:

03-27-2011, 12:21 AM	#2420
burzum Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Boston Posts: 172	Few from M28 f2.8

03-27-2011, 12:23 AM	#2421
burzum Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Boston Posts: 172	Few more :-)

03-27-2011, 01:37 AM	#2422
womble Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Hertfordshire Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,324	One more sheep shot. This one is proving very popular on Flickr! Pentax K20D and SMC Pentax-M 100mm f/2.8 lens. Best wishes, Kris.

03-27-2011, 08:36 AM	#2423
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Here's a few shots where I was really happy to have the new M120/2.8. It's a venue I've never shot in before - an old hotel. No stage lights, so I'm really pushing things in terms of ISO and shutter speed. The extra reach over the M100/2.8 got me better framing / more detail on the clarinetist and drummer, and the extra half stop or so over the M135/3.5 was pretty much the difference between usable and unusable in terms of noise and blur (yes, some day, a K-5-class camera upgrade is what I'd want). Also, the fact that it's just that much wider than the 135 helped - the guitarist shot would not have worked with a 135 from the vantage point I used for that shot (leaning against a pole). I also took a couple with my DA70 from that spot, but neither turned out to be usable.

03-27-2011, 09:43 AM	#2425
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	a few from last saturday afternoon using the m 50 f1.7. mostly between 1.7-2.8. Ronnie Hayward and friends

03-27-2011, 10:00 AM	#2426
paulh Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: DFW Texas/Ventura County, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 33,262	Some nice work posted here lately - Eddie & Marc, really like the musician shots - beautiful!

03-27-2011, 10:58 AM	#2428
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	Thanks Paul, Musicians are usually great subjects no music yesterday an Alternate from yesterdays Single in march shots m50 f1.7 @ 1.7

03-27-2011, 12:26 PM	#2429
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I used to think that M's were inferior to K lenses, based upon a few side by side comparisons of the K50F1.4 to M50F2 and the K105F2.8 to the K100F2.8 where I fent there was some definite difference in teh"feel" of the lens. Of course, to be fair, the K50/1.4 should be a nicer lens than the M50/2, just based on what I assume they originally cost. But I'm glad to hear the M35/2 measures up. I don't have a need for such a lens myself, but I've always thought that this made a lot of sense as a first (or second, after the ubiquitous 50) prime for most people. I for one have no problem with cat shots, and that's a nice one!

03-27-2011, 12:36 PM	#2430
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Of course, to be fair, the K50/1.4 should be a nicer lens than the M50/2, just based on what I assume they originally cost. But I'm glad to hear the M35/2 measures up. I don't have a need for such a lens myself, but I've always thought that this made a lot of sense as a first (or second, after the ubiquitous 50) prime for most people. I for one have no problem with cat shots, and that's a nice one! Thanks Marc Re the difference between the K and M it is (or was previously) not optics but mechanics. The other Ms I tried just seemed to be lacking the same silky smooth feel. They all seemed a little rough by comparison, but maybe when you consider my K lenses 50/1.4, 135/2.5, 300/4 I was unfairly comparing some really great lenses and expecting a "kit lens" to be the same