[Erictator]

So much accurate detail in the rendering! The DOF scale is beautiful. It's probably the artist's own camera. He saw an opportunity to give homage to Pentax/Takumar and took it. Photography didn't figure in the show.

Yeah, the more you look, the more you notice, like I just noticed the clip on flash shoe, heh heh.
Eric

[ultraviolet]

SMC Takumar 85mm f1.8

[tim60]

Two more with the 20mm from today. A couple of inches to the right and the first photo would've been much more dramatic I think. The central vertical would have been perfectly centered and the photo would've popped. Oh well, a learning experience. These were taken at f9 I think.

I agree with you judgement. Those are examples of what that lens is good for.

---------- Post added 03-30-16 at 07:06 AM ----------

SMC Takumar 85mm f1.8

That worked nicely.

[paulh]

SMC Tak 55/1.8

[Dartmoor Dave]

Two more with the 20mm from today. A couple of inches to the right and the first photo would've been much more dramatic I think. The central vertical would have been perfectly centered and the photo would've popped. Oh well, a learning experience. These were taken at f9 I think.

I'm impressed by the sharpness you're getting in the corners with the 20mm on full frame. I was worried that it would be quite soft at the edges, but you're getting excellent results.

When I use my 20mm Super Takumar with 35mm film, it's very soft at the corners at anything wider than f/11. Your SMC version seems to be much better.

[Andrew_Oid]

I had to run an errand across town today, and I took my camera along. I took a few pictures on the bus and kind of like one where I released the shutter just as the bus lurched away from the bus stop. It's the second bus picture. I'm really curious to understand why one portion of the scene is tack sharp while the rest of it shows the effect of a slow shutter speed and sudden movement. The last photo was a striking bus ad I'd never seen before. (Your guess is as good as mine what they're selling, dried noodles in a cup?) I was zone focusing at f9, ISO 100. I think I might be better off setting the ISO to 200, maybe even a tad higher, to get less blur. Still learning . . .

---------- Post added 03-30-16 at 07:05 AM ----------

I'm impressed by the sharpness you're getting in the corners with the 20mm on full frame. I was worried that it would be quite soft at the edges, but you're getting excellent results.

When I use my 20mm Super Takumar with 35mm film, it's very soft at the corners at anything wider than f/11. Your SMC version seems to be much better.

I'm glad to hear you think I got a good copy. I agree about sharpness. Distortion seems minimal to my eye as well. I wish I had your environment to photograph and look forward to seeing more of your work with the lens. It's what decided me to get one.

[Andrew_Oid]

I meant to add a distant scene, so here's a view of Bangkok's Victory Monument from an elevated walkway. (Again, the camera is zone focused at f9.) The lens is not at its best in situations like this. I'm thinking it's because the sensor is rendering a very large field of view. My camera has a 24 MP sensor. I'd be very interested to see if a 50 MP sensor would provide appreciably more resolution. Anyone have any ideas on this?

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Andrew_Oid]

The bus advert photo didn't seem to post, though whenever I try to re-post it I get a message that it was already posted. Anyway, I changed the name, and here it is (hopefully). A little bit was cropped from the left and the top.

[Dartmoor Dave]

I meant to add a distant scene, so here's a view of Bangkok's Victory Monument from an elevated walkway. (Again, the camera is zone focused at f9.) The lens is not at its best in situations like this. I'm thinking it's because the sensor is rendering a very large field of view. My camera has a 24 MP sensor. I'd be very interested to see if a 50 MP sensor would provide appreciably more resolution. Anyone have any ideas on this?

I wonder if maybe a 50MP sensor would out-resolve the fifty year old lens design? I'd certainly be fascinated to see how the 20mm handled it.

I know you can't make direct comparisons between digital and film, but the highest resolution "sensor" I've used with the 20mm is Fuji Velvia 50, which gives utterly gorgeous results -- mindblowing when projected 6ft wide.

Here's one from today with the SMC 28mm/3.5

[Andrew_Oid]

I wonder if maybe a 50MP sensor would out-resolve the fifty year old lens design? I'd certainly be fascinated to see how the 20mm handled it.

I know you can't make direct comparisons between digital and film, but the highest resolution "sensor" I've used with the 20mm is Fuji Velvia 50, which gives utterly gorgeous results -- mindblowing when projected 6ft wide.

Here's one from today with the SMC 28mm/3.5

Another wonderful picture.
Many years ago I went to university in England (Reading) and also bought my first camera and lenses there, an Exakta, a 50mm and a short zoom. I remember being impressed with the special color palette that the English countryside had, certain pastel shades of green and blue and rusty brown. I guess that would be an effect of the light which would be affected by ? (Britain being an island surrounded by water?)
It's too bad that we can't get objective data (MTF data) on these old lenses to see exactly how good they are and what their physical limitations are.
And then there's this that I read this morning: Lens Sharpness

[tim60]

Another wonderful picture.
Many years ago I went to university in England (Reading) and also bought my first camera and lenses there, an Exakta, a 50mm and a short zoom. I remember being impressed with the special color palette that the English countryside had, certain pastel shades of green and blue and rusty brown. I guess that would be an effect of the light which would be affected by ? (Britain being an island surrounded by water?)
It's too bad that we can't get objective data (MTF data) on these old lenses to see exactly how good they are and what their physical limitations are.
And then there's this that I read this morning: Lens Sharpness

I am not sure what it is, but the light here is very different than in Australia. Clearly the prevalence of cloud decreases the extreme of light and shadow but the colours?? I like the colours here, those greens which Australia simply does not have. BTW, I live about 50 miles from Reading and go there about once a month, so I experience the same part of the country you did.

[beachgardener]

I like the colours here, those greens which Australia simply does not have.

show us the greens?

[Andrew_Oid]

show us the greens?

It's one of the hues between the highlight and the shadow in this picture (which I didn't take).

[ultraviolet]

SMC Takumar 20mm f4.5
@f4.5

@f8

@f4.5

[Andrew_Oid]

I wanted to test the 20 some more so I took a river taxi ride up a few stops and back in the late afternoon and evening. For a long time I've thought 35mm was the ideal focal length (for 35mm), but I think the 20 is winning me over. All the pictures were taken at f9 with the camera zone focused (the f8 mark in the center of the infinity mark). ISO was set at 200. For the final shot taken half an hour or so after sunset, I had just disembarked from the boat onto a floating pier that was bobbing in the turbulence caused by the boat accelerating away from it, and the light was so dim I couldn't see anything in the optical viewfinder (f9), but the light was so beautiful I had to see what I would get and that was the shot (the only one). The photo of the girl's arm on the boat is to show how closely the lens focuses when zone focused at f9. She wasn't more than 2 feet from me and perhaps a bit less.