Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-12-2014, 11:20 AM   #1156
New Member
inextenza's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 9
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Essentially they are saying that if a lens is not identified correctly, manually select the correct profile and then click the arrows next to 'Setup' and select 'Save New Lens Profile Defaults.' Then you need to update your import preset to make this happen automatically.
I use this method for years, and there is still a problem: the metadatas are not updated, you can't filter on Sigma lenses

08-12-2014, 05:36 PM   #1157
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Essentially they are saying that if a lens is not identified correctly, manually select the correct profile and then click the arrows next to 'Setup' and select 'Save New Lens Profile Defaults.'
This only pertains to the lens profile selection.

It does not solve the problem of LR failing to associate the correct metadata with the image.

That's why I wrote earlier that Adobe has a mechanism for user defined mappings from lens IDs to profiles and hence should also make user defined mappings from lens IDs to metadata (lens manufacturer and lens model) available.
08-12-2014, 06:09 PM   #1158
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by inextenza Quote
I use this method for years, and there is still a problem: the metadatas are not updated, you can't filter on Sigma lenses
True. I can't remember what year I've taken certain photos on, but I can remember which lens I took it with...
08-12-2014, 06:27 PM   #1159
Pentaxian
LFLee's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Western MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
I loaned my Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 so I could borrow a colleagues 18-35mm f/1.8 for use on my Nikon D800E, with DX crop mode on it is basically the same sensor as the Pentax K5IIs.


A Bokeh comparison between the Pentax FA31mm f/1.8 and Sigma 18-35mm:


Left Pentax K5IIs - SMCP-FA31mm f/1.8 Limited - Right Nikon D800E with Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 @ 31mm f/1.8 [ DX crop mode]

The Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Lens needed a +6 adjustment on my D800E to focus accurately. However the anomaly that has been driving me up the wall is the frog egg bokeh, I'm stumped as to what is causing it. I have a hypothesis about what could be causing it, but so far I have been unable to replicate or isolate the cause of it under controlled conditions.

Here is an example where the effect rears its profoundly ugly head:


Nikon D800E With Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 @ 18mm f/1.8 [DX crop mode]

Other than that I have been impressed with the close focus performance of this lens (on the D800E). Sigma has a history of playing fast and casual with term "macro" on their lenses and having less than optimal close focusing distances on their lenses, While the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 isn't explicitly regarded as a macro lens, it is good to see the lens is capable of producing excellent results at close focusing distances:


Nikon D800E With Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8@ 35mm f/4 [DX crop mode]
The 'frog egg' bokeh or what I heard others said, "onion ring bokeh" is known before this lens start shipping. I remember a Sigma rep said something like they will look into it (during prototype samples) but apparently they didn't solve it.

08-12-2014, 07:09 PM - 1 Like   #1160
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
QuoteOriginally posted by LFLee Quote
The 'frog egg' bokeh or what I heard others said, "onion ring bokeh" is known before this lens start shipping. I remember a Sigma rep said something like they will look into it (during prototype samples) but apparently they didn't solve it.
The 35 F1.4 Art does OOF specular rings as well but so does my DA*200 (shown below)
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 

Last edited by bossa; 09-15-2014 at 05:49 PM.
12-04-2014, 04:51 AM   #1161
Senior Member
ddamski's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bern , Switzerland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 142
Just a feedback from my side for the Sigma lens. I had this for Nikon mount and was working perfectly. For pentax mount i have problems with autofocus. On far distance it is not accurate.. And my copy was already once in the Sigma Service (not for autofocus). Such a good lens optically, hope they get this right this time
12-04-2014, 05:03 AM   #1162
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,795
QuoteOriginally posted by ddamski Quote
I had this for Nikon mount and was working perfectly. For pentax mount i have problems with autofocus. On far distance it is not accurate.
Niether was mine - I bought the dock and fixed that issue. IMO the dock is a critical accessory for lenses like this

12-04-2014, 05:54 AM   #1163
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,636
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
The 35 F1.4 Art does OOF specular rings as well but so does my DA*200 (shown below)
Uh-oh, throw it in the trash!

I've always wondered what the big deal was about the rings. I don't think I would have noticed them if they weren't pointed out, and even then, I don't think they really hurt the image.

12-04-2014, 06:37 AM   #1164
baj
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 43
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Niether was mine - I bought the dock and fixed that issue. IMO the dock is a critical accessory for lenses like this
Does it now work as well as the Nikon version? Is it really possible that the AF issues with this lens can be fixed with the USB dock (this means that the AF is not inconsistent but simply miscalibrated)?!? Since you had already sent your lens in for service I assume that what you did with the USB dock was focus adjustment only and not firmware update?
12-04-2014, 06:48 AM   #1165
Emperor and Senpai
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nashville, IN
Posts: 5,416
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
I've always wondered what the big deal was about the rings. I don't think I would have noticed them if they weren't pointed out, and even then, I don't think they really hurt the image.
I thought the same myself.
12-04-2014, 08:49 AM   #1166
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,795
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
I've always wondered what the big deal was about the rings. I don't think I would have noticed them if they weren't pointed out, and even then, I don't think they really hurt the image.
Let me illustrate for you:






Pentax K5IIS - sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 @ 18mm f/1.8 - 50% crop


Pentax K5IIS - Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 @ 20mm f/1.8 - 100% crop inset

and you think you wouldn't notice this effect at all unless someone pointed it out.
12-04-2014, 09:31 AM - 2 Likes   #1167
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,406
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
and you think you wouldn't notice this effect at all unless someone pointed it out.
Well, now that you've pointed it out, it'll bother the begeesis out of me. I'll never forgive you!

Last edited by dadipentak; 12-04-2014 at 09:56 AM.
12-04-2014, 10:54 AM - 1 Like   #1168
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,636
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Let me illustrate for you:

and you think you wouldn't notice this effect at all unless someone pointed it out.
I don't know how you'll take this, but I think your example perfectly illustrates why it's pretty much a non-issue for me.

You have to be looking at a magnified detail to see it, and even if you do see it, so what? Are tiny filled-in circles fundamentally better than tiny doughnut circles? Neither one particularly reflects how we see things in the real world, and I don't know how you could say that either optical manifestation is objectively better than the other. Some people might think the circles are kind of cool.

And all of this pre-supposes that the bokeh circle is even visible or noticeable under normal viewing circumstances.

And apparently some Pentax lenses also do it, but I don't ever recall it being bemoaned or even mentioned on here before the Sigma 18-35mm.

Last edited by Edgar_in_Indy; 12-07-2014 at 07:21 AM.
12-04-2014, 03:19 PM   #1169
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,832
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Let me illustrate for you:
Interesting. Micro-doughnut bokeh.

Normally you only see bokeh like that when using catadioptric mirror lenses. Maybe there are some unintended internal reflections going on.
12-04-2014, 04:58 PM   #1170
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
I don't know how you'll take this, but I think your example perfectly illustrates why it's pretty much a non-issue for me.

You have to be looking at a magnified detail to see it, and even if you do see it, so what? Are tiny filled-in circles fundamentally better than solid tiny circles? Neither one particularly reflects how we see things in the real world, and I don't know how you could say that either optical manifestation is objectively better than the other. Some people might think the circles are kind of cool.

And all of this pre-supposes that the bokeh circle is even visible or noticeable under normal viewing circumstances.

And apparently some Pentax lenses also do it, but I don't ever recall it being bemoaned or even mentioned on here before the Sigma 18-35mm.


+1
That's some real pixel peeping noticing that...and even then, I don't think it detracts or distracts at all.


And regarding the top image, the bokeh is a little nervous. But it is also at 18mm, so your not going to get the creamy bokeh.
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!
18-35mm, angles, aperture, cameras, canikon, canon, dc, f/2.8, f1.8, fisheye, hsm, iso, k-3, landscape, length, lens, lenses, motor, mounts, nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, review, sigma, sigma 18-35mm f1.8, sr, uk, zeiss
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 35mm F1.4 for Pentax: ETA 4/30 Adam Pentax News and Rumors 181 02-16-2014 06:44 PM
Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 detail. rlatjsrud Photographic Industry and Professionals 42 10-06-2013 01:41 PM
New Sigma 18-35 F1.8 APS-C yygomez Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 04-19-2013 04:11 PM
Pentax 35mm F2.4 AL DA L Lens vs Sigma 28mm f1.8 Aspherical orchid Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 04-22-2011 12:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:42 PM. | 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