Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-08-2014, 12:24 PM   #31
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,542
QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
Hang on a minute, now I am doing it the same way as Bob Atkin: Camera Lens Testing- Sharpness, Chromatic Aberration and Distortion - Bob Atkins Photography
Didn't you go the wrong way to solve the resolution problem of your print?
Na CAHudson is spot on with his setup. It is still a valid point though to double the distance (go 5metres for 50mm lens) and then you multiply the resolved number by 100 to get ipmm. And then you are working on a chunk of the chart that has printed properly.

QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
I agree hnikesch, the Pentax DA55-300 is a super consumer zoom. Maybe GUB has a bad cop
I think I have a poor one. But from what I gather everone's 55-300 hunts for focus and I suspect that is because they are particularly soft wide open.

04-08-2014, 01:05 PM   #32
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,542
DAL 55-300 @ approx f8

This is done at CAHudsons 50x (2.75metres from target) , 55mm, and f8 approximated by matching shutter speed. As you can see this ain't no oil painting
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
04-08-2014, 01:07 PM   #33
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 147
Original Poster
Time for a Dog...

This is a 28mm F2.8 M42 Soligor Auto Wide S/N 966xxx - indicating it was made by Kino Precision. It is a beautifully built lens. The broad Focus Ring is as smooth as a good Tak. Mint condition.

Unfortunately, optically it is a dog. On a K-01 it had passable center resolution at 5.6, but on the Q? I don't think so.

Soligor28_2.8_5.6Ctr
Soligor28_2.8_5.6Edge


Now you can see what a bad lens really looks like
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
04-08-2014, 01:33 PM   #34
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,542
QuoteOriginally posted by cahudson42 Quote
This is a 28mm F2.8 M42 Soligor Auto Wide S/N 966xxx - indicating it was made by Kino Precision. It is a beautifully built lens. The broad Focus Ring is as smooth as a good Tak. Mint condition.

Unfortunately, optically it is a dog. On a K-01 it had passable center resolution at 5.6, but on the Q? I don't think so.

Soligor28_2.8_5.6Ctr
Soligor28_2.8_5.6Edge


Now you can see what a bad lens really looks like
Sure there wasn't an earthquake when you took the picture?

04-08-2014, 03:31 PM   #35
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
Given that there is no glass in a adapter I can't see how they can make an ounce of difference other than perhaps contrast if the insides are shiny.
I used a third party one for the 110 50mm and my own build for the 24mm and this 18mm sample. (basically thru a helicoid extension with a Q mount stuck to an m42 thread at the camera.)
I do wonder if the physical shutter may make a difference as against the scanning of the sensor and this would be a great test base to try it on. Given that it is a stationary subject I doubt there is a difference.
So this is the 110 18mm @f4.5 treated the same as above. (distance 1.8 metres)
Question is one of mechanical shutter vs rolling shutter.
04-08-2014, 03:57 PM   #36
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 147
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
This is done at CAHudsons 50x (2.75metres from target) , 55mm, and f8 approximated by matching shutter speed. As you can see this ain't no oil painting
Ugh! The photos over at the PF User Lens Reviews - while likely all APS-C - certainly don't look like yours.

Almost seems something inside came loose. Any rattles? Anything move if you look thru the lens and cartwheel it? Anyone nearby have one you can compare with?

Anyone here able to shoot the same setup and show us their results?
Chris
04-08-2014, 04:45 PM   #37
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
I have a DAL 55-300, and the chart below is center @ one stop closed on the Pentax adapter about f5.6, I tried f8 but 5.6 was better, the second chart is at about 150mm that is all the room I had to get away from the chart and still fill the frame also 1 stop closed should be about f6,something, I used a LCD hood loupe and 4X focus aid no peaking. Seems the lens is best when only stopped down one stop on the adapter, On my K30 and Kr it was best at f8, I did have to do a AF focus adjustment on the Kr to +3 to get better results from the lens, The K30 was +1



At 150mm



As I had hoped the lens is better at the tele end, maybe this weekend I can get outside and try 300mm

Last edited by hnikesch; 04-08-2014 at 04:55 PM.
04-08-2014, 05:02 PM   #38
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,542
QuoteOriginally posted by hnikesch Quote
I have a DAL 55-300, and the chart below is center @ one stop closed on the Pentax adapter about f5.6, I tried f8 but 5.6 was better, the second chart is at about 150mm that is all the room I had to get away from the chart and still fill the frame also 1 stop closed should be about f6,something, I used a LCD hood loupe and 4X focus aid no peaking. Seems the lens is best when only stopped down one stop on the adapter, On my K30 and Kr it was best at f8, I did have to do a AF focus adjustment on the Kr to +3 to get better results from the lens, The K30 was +1



At 150mm



As I had hoped the lens is better at the tele end, maybe this weekend I can get outside and try 300mm
Wow what a difference to mine

Footnote: had a retest at various settings and my test above is as good as it gets.


Last edited by GUB; 04-08-2014 at 05:41 PM.
04-08-2014, 05:05 PM   #39
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,542
28mm shoot out

Taken at 1.5 metres so 50x.
As expected the M did well especially wide open followed by the Tak.
Attached Images
 
04-08-2014, 05:11 PM   #40
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
Wow what a difference to mine
Like I said above, on my K30 the 55-300 works best at f8 and at the long end, I find myself refocusing often pushing the shutter 1/2 depressed about 3 or 4 times before taking the shot just to see if it refocuses. I use center point only, focus and reposition to compose the shot. I did a test with the camera on a tripod and focused in a license plate in the distance and changed the AF compensation until I got the sharpest image and the Kr was +3 the K30 was +1. On the k30 you can assign focus compensation for several lenses, the Kr was only global.

On the charts shot with the Q above I had to shoot and refocus 3 times to get one that sharp, it's wasn't easy, the 150mm shot I got on the first try.

On all of this testing I had several bad focused images where the 2nd attempt or 3rd was much better.

Last edited by hnikesch; 04-08-2014 at 05:16 PM.
04-09-2014, 10:35 AM   #41
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 147
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
Taken at 1.5 metres so 50x.
As expected the M did well especially wide open followed by the Tak.
Nice Baz,

Here are my results of my two best M42 28mm, an SMCT28mm F3.5 like yours, and a Vivitar Komine 28mm F2.8. The Viv appears to be an M42 version of this one in our Third Party Vivitar prime reviews: Vivitar MC 28mm f2.8 Wide Angle Lens Reviews - Vivitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database Not bad stopped down to 5.6, however at 2.8 there is truly horrendous CA in both forward and rear OOF areas.

Both better than the 'earthquake' Soligor, and the really poor ACCURA (I didn't even bother trying it on Q).

Of course, all these 28s, being designed for about a 40mm film to lens mount distance, are retrofocus designs - with all the glass and complexity that goes with it.

I'm thinking your 110 lenses, perhaps with your binder ring reinforcement additions, likely make more sense to use in this focal length range (though the 24 is a bit soft??). So I sprung for a set at $15 - $20 each - 18, 24 and 50. 'On the way'...

I don't expect to replace my 50mm F4 Macro Tak with the 110 50mm - but who knows? (The MacroTak will always have a home on my K-01 anyway). But it will be interesting to see if the simpler more conventional design of the 24mm ends up better than the legacy M42 28s.

At least until I can consider an 06... (Really like to wait a bit to see how 06 durability pans out...)

Shots in order:

SMCT28_3.5_5.6Ctr
VivK28_2.8_5.6Ctr
SMCT28_3.5_5.6Edge
VivK28_2.8_5.6Edge
Accura28_2.8_5.6Ctr (25X on K-01)
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-01  Photo 
04-09-2014, 02:14 PM   #42
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,542
QuoteOriginally posted by cahudson42 Quote
I'm thinking your 110 lenses, perhaps with your binder ring reinforcement additions, likely make more sense to use in this focal length range (though the 24 is a bit soft??
No no no no I think the 24 and 18 are pretty well as sharp as the 50. Remember those tests I put in were at double the distance so 100x or in other words 2.5 is the new 5.
Don't forget a pack of ringbinder reinforcing rings and a felt tip it makes a hell of a difference. You would have seen that in the adapted lens thread.
I have taken the lens mount out of an old auto110 camera and mounted it on a turned washer that sits inside the helicoid setup that I showed on the adapted lens thread. The 18 and the incredibly tiny 24 sit down inside the m42 thread and you can use m42 ext tubes to create a hood for them. This gives a macro facility to the lens.
I have just bought a 70mm 110 off fleaplay-- it will be interesting to see how it goes.

---------- Post added 04-10-14 at 09:17 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by cahudson42 Quote
Nice Baz,

Here are my results of my two best M42 28mm, an SMCT28mm F3.5 like yours, and a Vivitar Komine 28mm F2.8. The Viv appears to be an M42 version of this one in our Third Party Vivitar prime reviews: Vivitar MC 28mm f2.8 Wide Angle Lens Reviews - Vivitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database Not bad stopped down to 5.6, however at 2.8 there is truly horrendous CA in both forward and rear OOF areas.

Both better than the 'earthquake' Soligor, and the really poor ACCURA (I didn't even bother trying it on Q).

Of course, all these 28s, being designed for about a 40mm film to lens mount distance, are retrofocus designs - with all the glass and complexity that goes with it.

I'm thinking your 110 lenses, perhaps with your binder ring reinforcement additions, likely make more sense to use in this focal length range (though the 24 is a bit soft??). So I sprung for a set at $15 - $20 each - 18, 24 and 50. 'On the way'...

I don't expect to replace my 50mm F4 Macro Tak with the 110 50mm - but who knows? (The MacroTak will always have a home on my K-01 anyway). But it will be interesting to see if the simpler more conventional design of the 24mm ends up better than the legacy M42 28s.

At least until I can consider an 06... (Really like to wait a bit to see how 06 durability pans out...)

Shots in order:

SMCT28_3.5_5.6Ctr
VivK28_2.8_5.6Ctr
SMCT28_3.5_5.6Edge
VivK28_2.8_5.6Edge
Accura28_2.8_5.6Ctr (25X on K-01)
So all our better 28s are hitting about 3.6? --- 180 lpmm
04-14-2014, 11:31 AM   #43
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 147
Original Poster
110 50mm and 24mm

With GUB's nice results with his 110 lenses, I sprung for a set and the Fotodiox adapter. For comparison, here are a couple of the same setup used for the 28's and earlier 50s. They are wide open - no ring binder reinforcers yet. 18mm later.

110_50_2.8Ctr
110_50_2.8Edge
110_24_2.8Ctr
110_24_2.8Edge

Looks to me the110 50 is pretty good both Center and Edge. Not as good contrast and CA as the 50 MacroTak and Super-Tak 55 - but those were best at 5.6. Pretty sharp... No hoods either on the 110s at this point.

The 24 to me seems as sharp as the earlier FF 28s at Center. Worse than the 50 at Edge, maybe not terrible - but not great.

For $15 each, I think they can tide me over until I win the lottery for an 06.. I did buy the 18mm too, but the performance of the 02 at 15mm seems so good, I'm wondering how much I will use it - unless I need the 2.8 stop.

Really light and compact when on the Q. Even with the Fotodiox the 50 is no larger than the 02, and the 24 and 18 are smaller and shorter

Next - stopping down like GUB. I'm tempted to try back stopdown like GUB, as well as front stopdown as someone did with a lensbaby disk. Anyone with experience doing it both ways, and if so, the differences?
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
04-15-2014, 03:49 AM   #44
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,542
QuoteOriginally posted by cahudson42 Quote
With GUB's nice results with his 110 lenses, I sprung for a set and the Fotodiox adapter. For comparison, here are a couple of the same setup used for the 28's and earlier 50s. They are wide open - no ring binder reinforcers yet. 18mm later.

110_50_2.8Ctr
110_50_2.8Edge
110_24_2.8Ctr
110_24_2.8Edge

Looks to me the110 50 is pretty good both Center and Edge. Not as good contrast and CA as the 50 MacroTak and Super-Tak 55 - but those were best at 5.6. Pretty sharp... No hoods either on the 110s at this point.

The 24 to me seems as sharp as the earlier FF 28s at Center. Worse than the 50 at Edge, maybe not terrible - but not great.

For $15 each, I think they can tide me over until I win the lottery for an 06.. I did buy the 18mm too, but the performance of the 02 at 15mm seems so good, I'm wondering how much I will use it - unless I need the 2.8 stop.

Really light and compact when on the Q. Even with the Fotodiox the 50 is no larger than the 02, and the 24 and 18 are smaller and shorter

Next - stopping down like GUB. I'm tempted to try back stopdown like GUB, as well as front stopdown as someone did with a lensbaby disk. Anyone with experience doing it both ways, and if so, the differences?
MMMM your results are similar to not far behind my attempts @f 4.5. I saw a definite improvement stepping my lens down so I suspect you will have an impressive result stopped down
04-15-2014, 05:36 AM   #45
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 147
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GUB Quote
MMMM your results are similar to not far behind my attempts @f 4.5. I saw a definite improvement stepping my lens down so I suspect you will have an impressive result stopped down
Hi Baz,

I had more light than you apparently had for your tests earlier in the thread. Also - it might just be me - but I found both lenses not as critical to focus as any of my FF Takumars. Even though the lenses are miniscule, there seemed to be more in-focus throw than on the Taks.

I usually focus on these tests using the center 'Siemens star' - getting the 'shimmer' to close in on the center circle while using focus peaking and 4x magnification. I did refocus both lens several times and re-shot (easy with only one 2.8 setting) and got virtually identical results.

I do wonder about how much variability there may be between samples - but so far I am very happy with these, particularly the 50mm, and really the 24mm, too.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, canon, crop, f1.7, f1.8, f5.6, frame, freebie, length, lens, lenses, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, pp, q10, q7, resolution, sensor, smc, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Adapted lenses tested on the Q : the reference thread crewl1 Pentax Q 1080 09-11-2017 08:09 AM
Do M39 adapted lenses focus to infinity on the Q? GibbyTheMole Pentax Q 14 10-16-2013 07:49 AM
Help with adapted lens on my Q stormtech Pentax Q 39 05-10-2013 09:25 AM
Autofocus on adapted Pentax lenses that have an SDM motor colonel00 Pentax Q 8 02-19-2013 05:20 PM
Comparing bokeh on 50's manual focus lenses. Voe Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 07-12-2008 06:13 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:11 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top