Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

memira · 11-19-2008, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by Stratman

Takumar F 28-80 does sports !! This lens is identical to the Pentax F 28-80, maybe just different coatings, but I rather like it...

The difference between the Takumar-F (Pentax-F) non SMC and the SMC ones is and always was a highly discussed topic... Is the only difference the lack of SMC coating...? According to Bojidar Dimitrov's Resources (Thank you so much Bojidar for your GREAT page !!!!!!) the whole construction is different...

F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Pentax-F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Anyway, Great Pics (and the proof that it is indeed possible to make sports Pics with Pentax

)

AndrewG NY · 11-19-2008, 10:56 AM

First, the obligatory camera lens porn:

Pentax-F Zooms, extended
Pentax-F Zooms, collapsed

And the fauna, this one with F 35-70 f/3.5-4.5, @70mm, f/5.6.
First spring flowers: PJM Rhododendon

Class A · 11-20-2008, 02:03 AM

Originally posted by jsherman999

What do you mean by 'unmanaged seamonkey' version?

You can add a "Color Management" add-on to Firefox. With it, Firefox will respect colour profiles and display images with correct colours (e.g., respecting Adobe colour space instead of presenting such images using an sRGB interpretation).

For Seamonkey (basically a combination of Firefox, Thunderbird, and a Page Composer, but not quite; I believe it is a fork, continuing the integrated Mozilla suite with Firefox/Thunderbird features) no such add-on exists so it just displays all images as if they were sRGB encoded (which most are).

I happened to look at your images using both browsers and the Firefox colours were noticeably more intense.

Charles Hueter · 11-20-2008, 03:33 PM

The F 50mm f/1.7 was my first autofocus lens.

K100D, f/2:

ME Super, Kodak Gold ISO200:

jsherman999 · 11-20-2008, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Class A

You can add a "Color Management" add-on to Firefox. With it, Firefox will respect colour profiles and display images with correct colours (e.g., respecting Adobe colour space instead of presenting such images using an sRGB interpretation).

For Seamonkey (basically a combination of Firefox, Thunderbird, and a Page Composer, but not quite; I believe it is a fork, continuing the integrated Mozilla suite with Firefox/Thunderbird features) no such add-on exists so it just displays all images as if they were sRGB encoded (which most are).

I happened to look at your images using both browsers and the Firefox colours were noticeably more intense.

Odd, I just installed Seamonkey, and looked at the images in this thread side-by-side with firefox, and there's absolutely no difference - do I need to turn on sRGB or something with Seamonkey?

.

Class A · 11-20-2008, 05:16 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

Odd, I just installed Seamonkey, and looked at the images in this thread side-by-side with firefox, and there's absolutely no difference - do I need to turn on sRGB or something with Seamonkey?

Odd. I just compared the two browsers again and

the colours look exactly the same

. The Firefox image is rendered much larger but other than that they look identical.

I guess Seamonkey was playing up in a strange way when I noticed the difference. I have some problems with the browser. It sometimes stops loading pages or loads them incompletely only. I would have switched to Firefox a while ago but I have zillions of passwords stored in Seamonkey which Firefox doesn't import (although it should).

Sorry for the false alarm, but I'm absolutely sure when I made the comparison the first time that there was a difference. Now the Seamonkey image is as vivid as the Firefox one. Still like it.

jsherman999 · 11-23-2008, 06:31 PM

.

f/2, On K100D. One of the last shots before his first (slight) haircut today!

Stratman · 11-23-2008, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by memira

The difference between the Takumar-F (Pentax-F) non SMC and the SMC ones is and always was a highly discussed topic... Is the only difference the lack of SMC coating...? According to Bojidar Dimitrov's Resources (Thank you so much Bojidar for your GREAT page !!!!!!) the whole construction is different...

F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Pentax-F 28-80/3.5-4.5

Anyway, Great Pics (and the proof that it is indeed possible to make sports Pics with Pentax

)

looks the the Takumar F is a clone from the second link you posted, here is the Page for the Takumar, Identical specs...
Takumar-F 28-80/3.5-4.5

arpaagent · 12-17-2008, 12:05 PM

Hey, I am sure that some of you have encountered the same problem with F-series, where the rubber half-ring on the barrel begins to come up. Has anyone found a good solution to this problem, using some type of glue, or rubber cement maybe? I'd rather not botch my lens up, since it is nearly perfect other than the rubber coming up.

247nino · 12-22-2008, 01:09 PM

I'll play ...

the only photo I have of my lens I once had...
F Zoom 70-200 f3.5-5.6

This lens was awesome, but I didn't find it attractive. I realized that how the lens looked almost didnt matter because I was looking through it and not at it.

It was a nice lens but I stopped using it and it left my stable with a very cute girl who wanted it and bought it off craigslist.

anyway here are a few samples that I love...

MikeW · 12-22-2008, 06:21 PM

My daughter (center left) dancing in the Nutcracker. Pentax-F 135 f2.8, wide-open, hand-held, in the dark.

ivoire · 12-22-2008, 06:44 PM

I'll sneak in a few from from the f*300 also

MikeW · 12-22-2008, 06:53 PM

The hummers are great!

jake.astig · 12-23-2008, 08:04 AM

wow those bird shots are excellent!

Asahiflex · 12-23-2008, 08:23 AM

Am I allowed to post my F-series lenses here too?

In the meantime, I also got the F 50/1.7.

I'll start with my night photo of the St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, shot with the F 70-210 zoom:

11-19-2008, 10:56 AM	#32
AndrewG NY Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Chappaqua, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 688	More F love First, the obligatory camera lens porn: Pentax-F Zooms, extended Pentax-F Zooms, collapsed And the fauna, this one with F 35-70 f/3.5-4.5, @70mm, f/5.6. First spring flowers: PJM Rhododendon

11-23-2008, 06:31 PM	#37
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237 Original Poster	F 50 1.7 . f/2, On K100D. One of the last shots before his first (slight) haircut today!

12-17-2008, 12:05 PM	#39
arpaagent Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Raleigh, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 803	Hey, I am sure that some of you have encountered the same problem with F-series, where the rubber half-ring on the barrel begins to come up. Has anyone found a good solution to this problem, using some type of glue, or rubber cement maybe? I'd rather not botch my lens up, since it is nearly perfect other than the rubber coming up. Last edited by arpaagent; 01-04-2009 at 08:45 AM.

12-22-2008, 06:44 PM	#42
ivoire Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,381	I'll sneak in a few from from the f300 also Last edited by ivoire; 04-18-2009 at 09:23 AM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
D-FA WR Club	Rico	Lens Clubs	672	1 Day Ago 07:37 PM
The M Club!	jsherman999	Lens Clubs	9629	2 Days Ago 08:27 AM
The A Club	jake.astig	Lens Clubs	4000	4 Days Ago 12:40 PM
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

11-19-2008, 05:49 AM	#31
memira New Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 20	Originally posted by Stratman Takumar F 28-80 does sports !! This lens is identical to the Pentax F 28-80, maybe just different coatings, but I rather like it... The difference between the Takumar-F (Pentax-F) non SMC and the SMC ones is and always was a highly discussed topic... Is the only difference the lack of SMC coating...? According to Bojidar Dimitrov's Resources (Thank you so much Bojidar for your GREAT page !!!!!!) the whole construction is different... F 28-80/3.5-4.5 Pentax-F 28-80/3.5-4.5 Anyway, Great Pics (and the proof that it is indeed possible to make sports Pics with Pentax )

11-20-2008, 02:03 AM	#33
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by jsherman999 What do you mean by 'unmanaged seamonkey' version? You can add a "Color Management" add-on to Firefox. With it, Firefox will respect colour profiles and display images with correct colours (e.g., respecting Adobe colour space instead of presenting such images using an sRGB interpretation). For Seamonkey (basically a combination of Firefox, Thunderbird, and a Page Composer, but not quite; I believe it is a fork, continuing the integrated Mozilla suite with Firefox/Thunderbird features) no such add-on exists so it just displays all images as if they were sRGB encoded (which most are). I happened to look at your images using both browsers and the Firefox colours were noticeably more intense.

11-20-2008, 03:33 PM	#34
Charles Hueter Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Austin, TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 42	The F 50mm f/1.7 was my first autofocus lens. K100D, f/2: ME Super, Kodak Gold ISO200:

11-20-2008, 04:17 PM	#35
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237 Original Poster	Originally posted by Class A You can add a "Color Management" add-on to Firefox. With it, Firefox will respect colour profiles and display images with correct colours (e.g., respecting Adobe colour space instead of presenting such images using an sRGB interpretation). For Seamonkey (basically a combination of Firefox, Thunderbird, and a Page Composer, but not quite; I believe it is a fork, continuing the integrated Mozilla suite with Firefox/Thunderbird features) no such add-on exists so it just displays all images as if they were sRGB encoded (which most are). I happened to look at your images using both browsers and the Firefox colours were noticeably more intense. Odd, I just installed Seamonkey, and looked at the images in this thread side-by-side with firefox, and there's absolutely no difference - do I need to turn on sRGB or something with Seamonkey? .

11-20-2008, 05:16 PM	#36
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by jsherman999 Odd, I just installed Seamonkey, and looked at the images in this thread side-by-side with firefox, and there's absolutely no difference - do I need to turn on sRGB or something with Seamonkey? Odd. I just compared the two browsers again and the colours look exactly the same . The Firefox image is rendered much larger but other than that they look identical. I guess Seamonkey was playing up in a strange way when I noticed the difference. I have some problems with the browser. It sometimes stops loading pages or loads them incompletely only. I would have switched to Firefox a while ago but I have zillions of passwords stored in Seamonkey which Firefox doesn't import (although it should). Sorry for the false alarm, but I'm absolutely sure when I made the comparison the first time that there was a difference. Now the Seamonkey image is as vivid as the Firefox one. Still like it.

11-23-2008, 07:20 PM	#38
Stratman Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: St Louis, Missouri U S A Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,464	Originally posted by memira The difference between the Takumar-F (Pentax-F) non SMC and the SMC ones is and always was a highly discussed topic... Is the only difference the lack of SMC coating...? According to Bojidar Dimitrov's Resources (Thank you so much Bojidar for your GREAT page !!!!!!) the whole construction is different... F 28-80/3.5-4.5 Pentax-F 28-80/3.5-4.5 Anyway, Great Pics (and the proof that it is indeed possible to make sports Pics with Pentax ) looks the the Takumar F is a clone from the second link you posted, here is the Page for the Takumar, Identical specs... Takumar-F 28-80/3.5-4.5

12-22-2008, 01:09 PM	#40
247nino Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sunnyvale, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 302	I'll play ... the only photo I have of my lens I once had... F Zoom 70-200 f3.5-5.6 This lens was awesome, but I didn't find it attractive. I realized that how the lens looked almost didnt matter because I was looking through it and not at it. It was a nice lens but I stopped using it and it left my stable with a very cute girl who wanted it and bought it off craigslist. anyway here are a few samples that I love...

12-22-2008, 06:21 PM	#41
MikeW Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Indiana Photos: Gallery Posts: 437	My daughter (center left) dancing in the Nutcracker. Pentax-F 135 f2.8, wide-open, hand-held, in the dark.

12-22-2008, 06:53 PM	#43
MikeW Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Indiana Photos: Gallery Posts: 437	The hummers are great!

12-23-2008, 08:04 AM	#44
jake.astig Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Philippines Posts: 160	wow those bird shots are excellent!

12-23-2008, 08:23 AM	#45
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Am I allowed to post my F-series lenses here too? In the meantime, I also got the F 50/1.7. I'll start with my night photo of the St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, shot with the F 70-210 zoom:

The F Club!

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!