[Rockdoctor]

A Mint++ M100/2.8 with correct caps should be $100 - $125 in a private sale - maybe a bit more. It is your choice how much money shiny paint is worth to you. I like shiny paint.

I bought mine from a Forum member for $100 with perfect optics and Mint- cosmetics, but incorrect Pentax caps - and it rarely leaves my MESuper, and does very well Green Button metered on my K10D. Color rendition on this lens is better than typical Pentax and it is sharp across the entire frame, even wide open. By f5.6 you can cut yourself and optimal is supposed to be f/11 (like every other lens).

Here is the link to the Lens Review entry on M100/2.8. I noted that the individual reviews in this case are moslty by esteemend regulars on this Forum whose opinions I judge to be reliable.

Forum lens reviews - M100/2.8

Probably not the VERY BEST "Portrait Lens" Pentax ever made, but considering the current cost, size, weight and excellent optics - versus the K105/2.8 or any of the 85's - it is in my opinion a great value.

Shiny paint is important to me. I like things clean and minty. I tend to treat them with respect. I feel good when I use something respectful, therefore I shoot different when I'm "In Love" with a lens. Do you know what I mean?

I payed $75 so I did good then. I'll try it out and see if I like it if not I'll sell it and put the proceeds toward the 85mm.

Thanks for your feedback. Well put.

[Marc Sabatella]

Marc, I really like the first one here. Did you use a graduated ND to get such even metering throughout that shot?

No, I use ACDSee Pro's "Advanced Lighting" tool to bring out the local contrast in the darks (foreground) by lightening, and to bring out the local contrast in the lights (sky) by darkening. It's kind of a unique tool, and really wonderful for this sort of thing.

[arpaagent]

Posted this in the "Post your photos" sub-forum along with some others, but wanted to share it with the M-Club for those that didn't catch it.

Palamedes Swallowtail (Papilio palamedes) Caterpillar
K-7, ISO 800, 1/100, f/8, SMC Pentax-M 85/2, 25mm Extension Tube

[8540tomg]

August 31st and already we have some colour change in my area. Must be Canada eh?



The M 400/5.6 and all M series lenses in general seem to provide the pastel blue, green and yellows found in the out-of-focus areas of this image. I don't seem to get the same effect from my K, A, or DA lenses. Must be different lens coatings. Anyone else notice this or is it just my imagination?

Tom G

[Jewelltrail]

Monochrome: I once was portaging northbound through the Quetico Provincial Park - wearing an 88 lb. aluminum Grumman as a hat - and encountered a southbound moose.

I sidestepped off the trail, crotched the canoe tip in a tree, and stood as still as I could until it passed. I was mentally prepared for some kind of an encounter, which fortunately did not occur.

Alas, the camera was in the Granite Bag carried by my bowman.

Great Story! Reminds me of some portaging we did once on Isle Royale with, BTW, heavy aluminum canoes--moose everywhere. At that time (1990) it was advertized as the last place in Continental US that wolves could be seen in their natural setting--had a great 2-weeks, but no wolves.

[Jewelltrail]

Canada_Rockies: Moose are the worst animals to encounter suddenly. They are unpredictable and as grouchy as any animal I have ever seen.

I must agree again! In the dense and remote sections of New England (Maine in particular) I have often bounced into moose suddenly--as close as 5 feet, out of nowhere. They actually use some remote trails. I have decided this is like a super highway for them, especially when you consider how difficult it must be to navigate with those massive racks atop their heads.

Canada_Rockies: It is essential to always give the animal the impression that he/she is in charge, and you are yielding to him/her.

What!!!!! Give them the impression???????????? By God they are in charge, and I'm always yielding, without thinking--programmed into my DNA.


LOL

[Jewelltrail]

Marc Sabatella: No, I use ACDSee Pro's "Advanced Lighting" tool to bring out the local contrast in the darks (foreground) by lightening, and to bring out the local contrast in the lights (sky) by darkening. It's kind of a unique tool, and really wonderful for this sort of thing.

Now this is a secret--thank you. It troubles me a bit though when I think of the cost involved in using filters to obtain this effect. If you do not mind, how much and what version of this software are you refering to? Thanks

[Marc Sabatella]

Now this is a secret--thank you. It troubles me a bit though when I think of the cost involved in using filters to obtain this effect. If you do not mind, how much and what version of this software are you refering to?

I used the beta version of the upcoming ACDSee Pro 3.0, which is actually freely usable during the beta period (next couple of months or so, I guess). The current product version is 2.5 and it costs $130; I'd expect the new version to be priced similarly. The "advanced lighting" tool I mentioned is available in both, but it *is* improved in 3.0.

I shouldn't do this, but here's the default conversion:



Need I say that my processed version is a lot closer to what I remember seeing? The AWB worked too well - it killed the color of the light, and the difference in value between the sky and ground just doesn't read right at all when reduced to the far more limited dynamic range our screens (and printers) can produce. If I expose for the ground, the sky is blown out, and if I expose for the sky as I did here, the ground is disappointingly dark. So I treated PP like I would a painting, trying to capture on a two dimensional surface the color and value relationships as they *felt* in real life. HDR-like, one might say, but using standard artists' techniques to make the light look believable.

Here's the complete list of what I did: set WB to the "Sunny" preset at 50% strength (to bring out the colors that the AWB had muted), set Fill Light = 10, Contrast = 20, and dragged up toward the left side and down toward the right side of the Advanced Lighting tool. Probably about 20 seconds of fiddling. In hindsight, I probably should have adjusted the white point on the curve tool as well.

FWIW, few of my posted images need such dramatic change to capture what I want.

[nanok]

the smc-m 75-150/4, my motorsports glass . thought i'd give it the glory it diserves, in this thread

[8540tomg]

the smc-m 75-150/4, my motorsports glass . thought i'd give it the glory it diserves, in this thread

Nice shot nanok! We don't see many shots from M series zooms in this thread.

Tom G

[nanok]

Nice shot nanok! We don't see many shots from M series zooms in this thread.

Tom G

yes, not many of them around anyway, i guess. and who would trust a zoom from that age? i bought this one just because i fell in love with the built quality, i was very reluctant about the image quality it might provide, but it needed a home, so i said "what the hell". surprise: this glass delivers, i almost don't miss my 50-200 da anymore (almost).

glad you like the shot btw . there's more of this, almost all the rally shots in my gallery lately are shot with this old guy, it's not just a "one of" "lucky shot".

[8540tomg]

yes, not many of them around anyway, i guess. and who would trust a zoom from that age? i bought this one just because i fell in love with the built quality, i was very reluctant about the image quality it might provide, but it needed a home, so i said "what the hell". surprise: this glass delivers, i almost don't miss my 50-200 da anymore (almost).

glad you like the shot btw . there's more of this, almost all the rally shots in my gallery lately are shot with this old guy, it's not just a "one of" "lucky shot".

Actually I have a copy of the M 75~150/4. Can't remember the last time I used though. You've inspired me. I try it out soon.

Tom G

[jax_zee]

Just picked this gem up recently: SMC M 50 1.4, K10...Some pix walking through a local State Forest.

[Jewelltrail]

Marc Sabatella: I used the beta version of the upcoming ACDSee Pro 3.0, which is actually freely usable during the beta period (next couple of months or so, I guess). The current product version is 2.5 and it costs $130; I'd expect the new version to be priced similarly. The "advanced lighting" tool I mentioned is available in both, but it *is* improved in 3.0.

I shouldn't do this, but here's the default conversion.........

Marc, thank you, so much, for taking the time to help me out. The orginal pic shows just how powerful a tool the "advanced lighting" is. Do you notice any distortions with larger sized files? If not, this beats the effect of filters--if you ask me. It hink I will invest in this ACDeeSee--

[dandog]

well i may aswell add to this cool thread(some excellent pics from all!)

some i took today with my smc-m 50/4(im in love with with lense at the moment,have hardly used my new da's )