Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-11-2015, 12:19 AM - 1 Like   #91
Senior Member
Matthew Saville's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by Omestes Quote
At the point, why not just get an APS-C camera? Lightweight. Weather sealed. Highly portable. Not $2000+.

But then again, I recently decided that I'm probably not going FF, instead opting for either a cheap K-3 and a good lens (I'm thinking the FA77 might enjoy a FA31 little brother), or for the K-3 II. I don't see the need, in my own photography, at least I don't see the need for the cost (I can buy a EM5 II, K-3, and a lens for the same price, to put things in perspective). I don't see it as the second coming, though I hope it does make Ricoh a tidy sum, and allows them to put that into lens design.
Done and done! I'm already a huge fan of the 1.5x crop, I think it is by far the most powerful and versatile sensor size of all. It is professionally capable at high ISOs, creates great shallow DOF with modestly affordable and compact lenses, and allows for significant space / weight savings over any FF option, including mirrorless FF.

However, I plan on owning both formats. As an astro-landscape photographer, I often go into the wilderness with 2-3 cameras, and usually only one of those need be full-frame, for when I absolutely must have the best high ISO performance possible, or the most resolution possible.

QuoteOriginally posted by Omestes Quote
As for you original point, I haven't really read about any of the "classic" lenses losing their luster with higher resolutions. That could because of nostalgia and expectations, or because Pentax really nailed it on some lenses. Probably a mixture of both.

So how has the 20 f4 suffered? It is just not as technically sound? Does this change anything? I have several flawed lenses, and I love putting their flaws to use. This isn't a matter of novelty, or a trophy, but those lenses do something that modern lenses generally avoid doing; have a personality. I don't need a perfectly flat, ultra sharp, super-neutral lens all the time. Sometimes that old, ugly, brick of metal takes a better picture. Hell, my favorite (with the most postive results according the the internet) lens is an ugly, creaky, cheap feeling plastic zoom with horrid bokeh (the F35-70 Macro). Of all my lenses, I feel dirty to say that it is probably the best lens I own, warts and all. For some reason I can wring more out of it than I can any of my "superior" lenses.
I'm not sure how to answer your main question here, but generally speaking, yes... When you cram this many pixels so densely, the older lenses do indeed often start to look abysmally soft. There is just no denying how insanely sharp a modern Nikon, Sigma, or Rokinon lens is, especially when stopped down just ~1 stop.

The Nikon 20mm f/4 AIS, for example, is indeed still a fantastic lens, however the modern 20mm f/1.8 is just so insanely sharp at f/4 that for serious projects, let alone paid jobs, It'd be silly to use the older classic lens just for posterity's sake.

Ironically, as an astro-landscape photographer, I do in fact like my lenses to have a perfectly flat plane of focus, be extremely high-performance in the absolute corners, and offer unparalleled wide-open sharpness. Admittedly, what I do is probably one of the most sterile, technically un-forgiving forms of "creativity", if you even want to call it creativity / art. I simply like to make landscape images at night, it entertains me.

It is a shame that my particular interest in photography does not better align with my affection towards classic cameras. I have a Nikon FM2 and an Asahi Pentax on my shelf that I love to put rolls of film through, when I'm doing more casual photography. I'd love to own a Nikon Df, and if Pentax made something similar, I'd love to own that too. But for now, that continues to be an enjoyment that I cannot always utilize for my more serious photography projects. I'm fine with that.

BTW, while we're on the topic of old, awesome looking lenses, what the heck is THIS lens? It doesn't even specify a mount type... https://www.keh.com/337011/pentax-18mm-f-2-8-110-lens-30-5

06-11-2015, 12:30 AM   #92
Veteran Member
tomtor's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 382
QuoteOriginally posted by Matthew Saville Quote

BTW, while we're on the topic of old, awesome looking lenses, what the heck is THIS lens? It doesn't even specify a mount type... https://www.keh.com/337011/pentax-18mm-f-2-8-110-lens-30-5
Pentax Auto 110 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
06-11-2015, 12:36 AM   #93
Senior Member
Matthew Saville's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
Thanks, I was looking to see 1.) if an adapter was available for the modern Pentax mount, and 2.) if it covered the 1.5x sensor size, or even the full-frame sensor size.

Based on my searching I think I've answered the 2nd question, but not the first. I've only heard of folks adapting these lenses to compact mirrorless bodies...?
06-11-2015, 01:20 AM   #94
Senior Member
Omestes's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 206
QuoteOriginally posted by Matthew Saville Quote
Done and done! I'm already a huge fan of the 1.5x crop, I think it is by far the most powerful and versatile sensor size of all. It is professionally capable at high ISOs, creates great shallow DOF with modestly affordable and compact lenses, and allows for significant space / weight savings over any FF option, including mirrorless FF.

However, I plan on owning both formats. As an astro-landscape photographer, I often go into the wilderness with 2-3 cameras, and usually only one of those need be full-frame, for when I absolutely must have the best high ISO performance possible, or the most resolution possible.



I'm not sure how to answer your main question here, but generally speaking, yes... When you cram this many pixels so densely, the older lenses do indeed often start to look abysmally soft. There is just no denying how insanely sharp a modern Nikon, Sigma, or Rokinon lens is, especially when stopped down just ~1 stop.

The Nikon 20mm f/4 AIS, for example, is indeed still a fantastic lens, however the modern 20mm f/1.8 is just so insanely sharp at f/4 that for serious projects, let alone paid jobs, It'd be silly to use the older classic lens just for posterity's sake.

Ironically, as an astro-landscape photographer, I do in fact like my lenses to have a perfectly flat plane of focus, be extremely high-performance in the absolute corners, and offer unparalleled wide-open sharpness. Admittedly, what I do is probably one of the most sterile, technically un-forgiving forms of "creativity", if you even want to call it creativity / art. I simply like to make landscape images at night, it entertains me.

It is a shame that my particular interest in photography does not better align with my affection towards classic cameras. I have a Nikon FM2 and an Asahi Pentax on my shelf that I love to put rolls of film through, when I'm doing more casual photography. I'd love to own a Nikon Df, and if Pentax made something similar, I'd love to own that too. But for now, that continues to be an enjoyment that I cannot always utilize for my more serious photography projects. I'm fine with that.

BTW, while we're on the topic of old, awesome looking lenses, what the heck is THIS lens? It doesn't even specify a mount type... https://www.keh.com/337011/pentax-18mm-f-2-8-110-lens-30-5
QuoteOriginally posted by Matthew Saville Quote
Ironically, as an astro-landscape photographer, I do in fact like my lenses to have a perfectly flat plane of focus, be extremely high-performance in the absolute corners, and offer unparalleled wide-open sharpness.
Ahh... I can totally see where you're coming from. I shoot a lot of macro, and I expect all of the qualities I just scoffed at from my macro lens (not the 35-70, that thing can continue being terrible). But for my "general photography" lenses, I want a bit of quirk. I was talking from more of an enthusiast's point of view, I suppose.

QuoteOriginally posted by Matthew Saville Quote
BTW, while we're on the topic of old, awesome looking lenses, what the heck is THIS lens? It doesn't even specify a mount type...
I would love it if someone came up with a way to adapt those to something like m43 (I'm guessing it wouldn't work on APS-C or FF, since 110 was pretty small). Our local antique mall has had a full 110 set sitting around for over 3 years, I've talked the seller down to a decent price before balking (I think only Lomo makes 110 film, and I have mixed experiences with their film). I would love an excuse to buy it, just for curiosities sake. Heck, even a Q adapter would be nice, it might actually push me to getting one.

06-11-2015, 01:27 AM   #95
Senior Member
Matthew Saville's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by Omestes Quote
I would love it if someone came up with a way to adapt those to something like m43 (I'm guessing it wouldn't work on APS-C or FF, since 110 was pretty small). Our local antique mall has had a full 110 set sitting around for over 3 years, I've talked the seller down to a decent price before balking (I think only Lomo makes 110 film, and I have mixed experiences with their film). I would love an excuse to buy it, just for curiosities sake. Heck, even a Q adapter would be nice, it might actually push me to getting one.
In my research it does sound like they make a couple different adapters, maybe for Sony NEX and Olympus Micro Four-Thirds.

In theory, all Pentax needs to do is create a new mirrorless system with a shorter flange distance, a la Sony, and the universal adaptability possibilities will be just as endless.

It would be truly fantastic to be able to adapt any lens to a 1.5x and full-frame mirrorless system that has a superior customer pride / history / nostalgia / ethic than Sony has right now; and if anybody is going to do it, its Pentax.
06-11-2015, 03:06 AM - 1 Like   #96
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,969
QuoteOriginally posted by Omestes Quote
At the point, why not just get an APS-C camera? Lightweight. Weather sealed. Highly portable. Not $2000+.

But then again, I recently decided that I'm probably not going FF, instead opting for either a cheap K-3 and a good lens (I'm thinking the FA77 might enjoy a FA31 little brother), or for the K-3 II. I don't see the need, in my own photography, at least I don't see the need for the cost (I can buy a EM5 II, K-3, and a lens for the same price, to put things in perspective). I don't see it as the second coming, though I hope it does make Ricoh a tidy sum, and allows them to put that into lens design.

As for you original point, I haven't really read about any of the "classic" lenses losing their luster with higher resolutions. That could because of nostalgia and expectations, or because Pentax really nailed it on some lenses. Probably a mixture of both.



So how has the 20 f4 suffered? It is just not as technically sound? Does this change anything? I have several flawed lenses, and I love putting their flaws to use. This isn't a matter of novelty, or a trophy, but those lenses do something that modern lenses generally avoid doing; have a personality. I don't need a perfectly flat, ultra sharp, super-neutral lens all the time. Sometimes that old, ugly, brick of metal takes a better picture. Hell, my favorite (with the most postive results according the the internet) lens is an ugly, creaky, cheap feeling plastic zoom with horrid bokeh (the F35-70 Macro). Of all my lenses, I feel dirty to say that it is probably the best lens I own, warts and all. For some reason I can wring more out of it than I can any of my "superior" lenses.
Obviously you can use whatever lens you want on your camera. The problem is that if you've spent a bunch of money buying a 24 megapixel APS-C or 36 megapixel full frame camera, you want to be sure that you are maximizing your resolution. If the glass is not up to the task, you might just as well just stuck with a K5 instead of going to a K3, for example.

The biggest reason to go with older lenses has been the fact that they tend to be cheaper, but with the prices some of the old Takumars go for now, it seems that you might be better saving your shekels and going with newer glass.
06-11-2015, 08:37 AM   #97
Senior Member
Omestes's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 206
QuoteOriginally posted by Matthew Saville Quote
It would be truly fantastic to be able to adapt any lens to a 1.5x and full-frame mirrorless system that has a superior customer pride / history / nostalgia / ethic than Sony has right now; and if anybody is going to do it, its Pentax.
When I was researching my second kit, Sony fit all the criteria except one; I don't trust them.

As long as Pentax managed to keep full K mount legacy support, I would love a small APS-C or FF mirrorless. I don't know how well they would be able to pull off a fully new mount, though. Sony can do it since they didn't really have a legacy, Canicon can do it because they are basically synonymous with "real cameras" (sadly). Looking at Pentax' selection of glass, and the speed in which they put out new designs, I'm not even sure if they could support a full pro line with a novel mount and design.

Perhaps FF will revitalize them, and allow this to hit the drawing board. The cynic in me doubts it, sadly.

Thanks for giving me a thing to research. I'm off to find 110 adapters.
06-11-2015, 08:52 AM - 1 Like   #98
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,782
QuoteOriginally posted by Omestes Quote
(...)

I would love it if someone came up with a way to adapt those to something like m43 (I'm guessing it wouldn't work on APS-C or FF, since 110 was pretty small). Our local antique mall has had a full 110 set sitting around for over 3 years, I've talked the seller down to a decent price before balking (I think only Lomo makes 110 film, and I have mixed experiences with their film). I would love an excuse to buy it, just for curiosities sake. Heck, even a Q adapter would be nice, it might actually push me to getting one.
110 format is half frame, equivalent to 4/3 today. There are adapters to use Pentax 110 lenses on some mirrorless systems: Pentax Q, 4/3, Fujifilm and Sony E, You'll obtain some vignetting with APS-C cameras though.

Besides, the iris of the Pentax 110 system was in the camera, not the lens. On a third-party camera, you will only be able to shoot wide open, i.e. at f/2.8.

06-11-2015, 08:59 AM - 1 Like   #99
Senior Member
Matthew Saville's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Obviously you can use whatever lens you want on your camera. The problem is that if you've spent a bunch of money buying a 24 megapixel APS-C or 36 megapixel full frame camera, you want to be sure that you are maximizing your resolution. If the glass is not up to the task, you might just as well just stuck with a K5 instead of going to a K3, for example.

The biggest reason to go with older lenses has been the fact that they tend to be cheaper, but with the prices some of the old Takumars go for now, it seems that you might be better saving your shekels and going with newer glass.
For me, the reason to go with older lenses has not only been the fact that they can be cheaper, but also for their look and the nostalgia of practicing the hobby of photography in general.

For many types of photography, I couldn't care less about megapixels or sharpness. In my job, I've had the great pleasure of reviewing kits such as this:



Highly impractical for professional purposes, heck the Nikon Df doesn't even have video! However it looks badass, and sometimes that's the fun of it. Sometimes.

Price is actually, on some lenses, a bit of a problem. A few Nikon classics fetch quite a pretty penny, some because they are still incredible performers, but others merely because they're legendary in general, though mediocre in actual performance.

The problem is, as I mentioned before, my penchant for classic lenses doesn't always align with my current passion in photography. When I have to worry about things like coma and field curvature, for astro-landscape photography, it is almost impossible for me to find a lens from 10+ years ago that comes even close to what a Rokinon lens can offer me today, for about the same price.

I'm not saying I won't still collect a handful of my favorite classic lenses, and use them on certain occasions. ;-)

---------- Post added 06-11-15 at 09:21 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Omestes Quote
When I was researching my second kit, Sony fit all the criteria except one; I don't trust them.

As long as Pentax managed to keep full K mount legacy support, I would love a small APS-C or FF mirrorless. I don't know how well they would be able to pull off a fully new mount, though. Sony can do it since they didn't really have a legacy, Canicon can do it because they are basically synonymous with "real cameras" (sadly). Looking at Pentax' selection of glass, and the speed in which they put out new designs, I'm not even sure if they could support a full pro line with a novel mount and design.

Perhaps FF will revitalize them, and allow this to hit the drawing board. The cynic in me doubts it, sadly.

Thanks for giving me a thing to research. I'm off to find 110 adapters.
This is the same reason that I've stayed with Nikon for so long: I do trust them. In the face of Canon's repeated signs of "marketing ploys" and sales tactics that hint their engineers must be shaking their fists at their corporate decisions, ...I stuck with Nikon through their "under dog" phase because I was impressed by their apparent passion for cramming every feature they possibly could into a camera, even if it meant allowing for significant "trickle-down" of professional features that their direct competition wouldn't have dreamed of including in a camera at a certain price point.

It is this trust, and the sense of keen passion for delivering cameras and features without concern for any imaginary boundaries fabricated under the guise of "friendly competition", that I currently show greater interest in Pentax' system more than any other.

I'll hopefully be picking up a K-3 II within a week or two, BTW. Expect my review to be up on SLR Lounge soon thereafter!
06-14-2015, 11:49 PM   #100
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,090
QuoteOriginally posted by Matthew Saville Quote
For me, the reason to go with older lenses has not only been the fact that they can be cheaper, but also for their look and the nostalgia of practicing the hobby of photography in general.
After a year of dithering I finally took the plunge and bought a second hand Nikon Df with the proceeds of some equipment sales (Olympus EM -1 and 12-50 mm f2.8, which I never took to for reasons that I won't go into here). I had balked at paying the launch price of 2,749, but I got this one for 1,599 in near mint condition with under 3,000 shutter actuations from Wex Photographic.

I bought it primarily because I liked the looks more than anything else - I already had a D810. But now I absolutely love it! I bought a new Nikkor 50 mm f1.2 to go with it (a fabulous lens that is still manufactured), and dug out my old 105 mm f2.5 (lovely!) and 24 mm f2.8 AiS lenses from my collection. They are manual focus of course, but despite people initially grumbling about the lack of a split prism screen I find focusing a breeze. In fact, I get as many keepers as I do with my D810 or K-3 on auto-focus. I also use old lenses on the K-3 from time to time, and don't have any problems manually focusing them, though it is easier on the larger screen of the Df.

At 16 MPx, the Df is more forgiving of older lenses which, after all, are still as sharp as they were in film days. It's just that we tend to notice the softness more when we examine 24 or 36 MPx images at 100%. I'll not be giving up my K-3, and I will buy the full-frame Pentax at some point, but the Df gives me a different experience. I actually find myself holding it like I held film cameras back in the day.
06-15-2015, 08:47 AM   #101
Senior Member
Omestes's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 206
QuoteOriginally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan Quote

At 16 MPx, the Df is more forgiving of older lenses which, after all, are still as sharp as they were in film days. It's just that we tend to notice the softness more when we examine 24 or 36 MPx images at 100%. I'll not be giving up my K-3, and I will buy the full-frame Pentax at some point, but the Df gives me a different experience. I actually find myself holding it like I held film cameras back in the day.
I just bought a film camera, for the same reasons. And all my crusty FSU glass looks as good as the day it was pumped out of the factory by communists.

I really need to pick up a Pentax film body.
06-15-2015, 09:00 AM   #102
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,732
QuoteOriginally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan Quote
At 16 MPx, the Df is more forgiving of older lenses which, after all, are still as sharp as they were in film days. It's just that we tend to notice the softness more when we examine 24 or 36 MPx images at 100%. I'll not be giving up my K-3, and I will buy the full-frame Pentax at some point, but the Df gives me a different experience. I actually find myself holding it like I held film cameras back in the day.
My Pentax K-30 is 16 MP, and works fine with my Pentax-M lenses from 30+ years ago; I hold it exactly the same way I held my Pentax Super Program 31 years ago. I guess I don't understand the distinction you're making
06-15-2015, 09:33 AM - 1 Like   #103
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
Besides, the iris of the Pentax 110 system was in the camera, not the lens. On a third-party camera, you will only be able to shoot wide open, i.e. at f/2.8.
On the Q, 110 users are addressing the aperture with corresponding discs dropped into the adapters, and getting great results.
See https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/209474-adapted-lenses-tested...ml#post2770369
06-15-2015, 11:48 AM   #104
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,090
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I hold it exactly the same way I held my Pentax Super Program 31 years ago. I guess I don't understand the distinction you're making
It's just that modern cameras have generous grips on the right-hand side, so I tend to keep a firm hold of that. The Df, like many older film cameras, does not have much of a grip on the body, so the main support is provided by my left hand under the body and lens. It's a subtle difference, but it makes for a different experience in my view.
06-15-2015, 11:57 AM   #105
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,732
QuoteOriginally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan Quote
It's just that modern cameras have generous grips on the right-hand side, so I tend to keep a firm hold of that. The Df, like many older film cameras, does not have much of a grip on the body, so the main support is provided by my left hand under the body and lens. It's a subtle difference, but it makes for a different experience in my view.
OK, I understand.

I still put my left hand on/under the lens when using the K-30 even though I no longer need to focus; no room for my left hand (unless I'm zooming) may be the reason I'm not quite comfortable with my Q-7.
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!
14mm, aperture, camera, control, dslr, f/2.8, film, filters, full-frame, ibis, ii, k-3, lens, lenses, matthew, nikon, olympus, on-camera, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photography, price, rokinon, sensor, sony, superhero, version
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The New PENTAX K-3 II Builds on the Performance Standard Set by Its Predecessor Furth Adam Homepage & Official Pentax News 5 05-17-2015 07:12 AM
How could be the Pentax K3-II AlessioOo Pentax K-3 93 05-06-2015 03:14 AM
Sorry, Pentax - I'm NOT buying the K-3 II. PALADIN85020 Pentax K-3 38 04-27-2015 12:36 PM
Is the new Sony A77 the real competitor to Pentax K-3? MJSfoto1956 Pentax K-3 23 02-08-2015 05:33 PM
Pentax could we get the K-5 II / K-5 IIs in color please? Hegemon Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 10-14-2012 01:59 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:01 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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