Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-26-2020, 09:35 AM   #91
Custom User Title
Loyal Site Supporter
FozzFoster's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Alberta
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,180
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
maximum magnification
reduced maximum magnification is an effect of focus breathing.

09-26-2020, 09:36 AM - 1 Like   #92
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 22,554
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
The difference of these images is purely the difference in maximum magnification, which everyone can read from any spec sheet. The Pentax 70-210/4 would allow much more close up detail of the subject than either lens in the twitter post.

So thanks for the proof that basically nobody is after "focus breathing", but many are after maximum magnification.
Very much so. Max magnification is a combination of minimum focus distance and focal length at that distance. If the DFA *70-200 could focus to 0.5 meters it could possibly have more magnification than most of the other lenses mentioned here, even with focus breathing in consideration.

At the same time, the 70-210 f4 has a max magnification of .32x.

All of that still makes it clear that none of these lenses is a true substitute for a macro lens. Further, if you are doing a portrait shoot, there is no reason that you would think about "focus breathing" at all, even though it does get harped on by reviews quite a bit.

(Jaguar with DFA *70-200)

09-26-2020, 09:39 AM - 2 Likes   #93
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MMVIII's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: EU
Posts: 767
QuoteOriginally posted by FozzFoster Quote
I find it more interesting that there is a clear difference and how ardently people will claim the difference is either not there or doesn't matter.
Really? It sure is a nice lens, but I would not expect anything else from a new Nikkor for 2.533,48 .

And as beholder3 said, is this really a Pentax problem? Sure, the less the better, but, as they say, good image quality, decent price, low focus breathing - choose two.
09-26-2020, 09:46 AM   #94
Custom User Title
Loyal Site Supporter
FozzFoster's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Alberta
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,180
QuoteOriginally posted by MMVIII Quote
is this really a Pentax problem?
It's a lot of lens' problems, throughout most (all) brands!

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 10:51 AM ----------

its so bizarre to me other brands have identified (callin it out by name) an issue and mitigated that issue on subsequent models, and when I suggest Pentax might do the same, it's oh such an unreasonable suggestion.

09-26-2020, 09:58 AM - 1 Like   #95
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,113
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
It all is very basic trigonometry.

The formula for effective focal length at MFD is (use same units for focal lnegths and MFD, e.g. mm or m):
focal length at MFD = MFD/(MaxMagnification+(1/MaxMagnification)+2)
Ah, thanks for writing it.
So, quick recap:
-D FA* 70-200/2.8: 122mm (ouch!) at 1.2m
-D FA 70-210/4: 168 mm at 0.95m. It breathes quite a lot, but since you can get much closer it gets higher magnification.
-DA* 60-250/4: 125 mm at 1.1m (also ouch). I'd like to see the maximum mag/MFD at 60mm to see how much width you gain at short distances, but of course I cannot find it.
-FA* 80-200/2.8: 187mm at 1.4m, showing that an internal zoom, internal focus lens can have very little breathing.
-For comparison, the latest Canon EF 70-200/2.8 breathes down to 172mm (MFD same as the D FA*, but mag is 0.21x instead of 0.13x). Interestingly, according to ePhotozine, this lens is best at the extremes of the zoom range, with the corners suffering at 100 and 135mm.
-Nikon 70-200/2.8G (the "much reduced breathing" one): 157mm. Still worse than the Canon.
-Tamron 90/2.5 Macro 1:2: 110 mm (which makes sense because the image gets noticeably bigger when you focus closer) at 39 cm. Of course, not internal focus.

So, still not a big deal... and the best one there is still a Pentax .
09-26-2020, 09:58 AM - 4 Likes   #96
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,747
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
At the same time, the 70-210 f4 has a max magnification of .32x.
All of that still makes it clear that none of these lenses is a true substitute for a macro lens.
Depends on what you intend to shoot. The 1:3 max magnification of the 70-210/4 is where I personally consider it "macro" already.

Remember that 1:3 means that on a 36mm wide FF sensor you'll be able to completely fill the frame with a subject that is just about 10 cm wide (3x 3,6xm). For flowers and dragonflies that should be good enough for many.

My personal favorite "macro" lens alway was the DA*300/4 plus TC.

---------- Post added 26th Sep 2020 at 19:02 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
Ah, thanks for writing it.
So, quick recap:
Rondec already linked to my old table, so here it is again for those who don't want to follow links:

09-26-2020, 10:10 AM   #97
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,113
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote

Rondec already linked to my old table, so here it is again for those who don't want to follow links:
Missed it! Thanks for the reminder.

Well, the FA* was missing so at least I didn't whip out excel for nothing . Second best after the Olympus (in terms of breathing, I mean)

Another addendum is that people might also be after a comfortable working distance as well as the magnification - too long of a MFD is a pain to work with sometimes.
09-26-2020, 10:11 AM - 5 Likes   #98
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 36,214
QuoteOriginally posted by FozzFoster Quote
I find it more interesting that there is a clear difference and how ardently people will claim the difference is either not there or doesn't matter.
No one said there is no difference.

I said anytime there is a clear difference, the difference works to your advantage in some cases, and a disadvantage in others. There is simply no differentiation that always favours one over the other, per se. If there is a circumstance where one is better, there will be another circumstance that favours the other.

There should be no expectation that focus breathing or not changes anything. You still have to understand the lens and how it performs. There is no internal human atibute that understands focus breathing lenses better or worse than non-focus breathing lenses. This is marketing nonsense.

You can see why I hate Tony Northrup in the images on twitter. He posts the difference, but in that case he clearly demonstrates you may like the image with focus breathing better. He's too dense to realize what he's done. So if you like the lower image better, how is that an argument for buying a lens that doesn't focus breath?

Same with all his total light nonsense, APS-c vs FF nonsense. He always composes for the lens he's promoting, then shows you how bad what he's comparing to is by shooting with conditions that are optimized for the lens he favours. . When in fact if he composed for the system he's trashing, then showed how bad the one he favours is you would come the opposite conclusion. You seriously need to be able to see through his nonsense if you are to get anything positive from his writing.

The lenses just are what they are. Whether you use a lens that focus breaths or one that doesn't you will lose shots if you don't change lenses at times. The notion that a no-focus breathing lens saves lens changes is nonsense. With any lens you will exploit it's strengths and avoid it's weakness. It changes not one iota because you have a lens that has pronounced focus breathing and one that doesn't. You still have to know your lens and adjust it's settings so you get what you want. A lens that doesn't focus breath saves you nothing, overall, it may make you life easier in some circumstances, and that will be balanced by the situations where it makes your life harder.


Last edited by normhead; 09-26-2020 at 12:45 PM.
09-26-2020, 10:13 AM - 1 Like   #99
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,747
QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
Another addendum is that people might also be after a comfortable working distance as well as the magnification - too long of a MFD is a pain to work with sometimes.
But then a very long MFD is exactly what people buy long focal length macros for. Certainly not for "subject separation"

It depends - as always.
09-26-2020, 10:18 AM - 1 Like   #100
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,113
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote

You can see why I hate Tony Northrup in the images on twitter. He posts the difference, but in that case he clearly demonstrates you may like the image with focus breathing better.He's too dense to realize what he's done. SO if you like the lower image better, how is that an argument for buying a lens that doesn't focus breath?
Well, in this particular case, you just... zoom out. The top lens can get the bottom image. The bottom lens can't get the top image, if you want that one better. Of course, the appropriate comparison includes using both at 70mm to see where breathing can help instead of getting in the way (in his example, by forcing you to change perspective by getting closer).

Like you said, once you have a lens and know its actual FL range for close distance as well as the long distance "official" one, well, then you can know how and when to properly use the thing.


I couldn't care less that my 90/2.5 macro breathes. Heck, it helps because it gives me more working distance at 1:2 magnification! I get 25cm from the front element to the focus plane, which is comfortable enough.

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 10:19 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
But then a very long MFD is exactly what people buy long focal length macros for. Certainly not for "subject separation"

It depends - as always.
One could be forgiven for thinking that interchangeable lenses are selected (and mounted on the camera) based on what you need them to do, huh
09-26-2020, 10:33 AM   #101
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 36,214
QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
Well, in this particular case, you just... zoom out. The top lens can get the bottom image. The bottom lens can't get the top image, if you want that one better. Of course, the appropriate comparison includes using both at 70mm to see where breathing can help instead of getting in the way (in his example, by forcing you to change perspective by getting closer).
And I could set up a scenario at the bottom end of the spectrum, 60mm for my 60-250, where my 60-250 at 60mm could get the image I want, and a non-breathing 60-250 couldn't. What you gain on one end, you lose on the other. And that's the essence of why focus breathing or not doesn't really matter. What matters is that you appreciated what you have, and accept it's limitations to get it's strengths.

To say focus breathing has no strengths is to be like Tony Northrup.

Last edited by normhead; 09-26-2020 at 10:43 AM.
09-26-2020, 10:47 AM   #102
Custom User Title
Loyal Site Supporter
FozzFoster's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Alberta
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,180
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
To say focus breathing has no strengths is to be like Tony Northrup.
I used to watch his YouTube videos when I was first starting off like 5-6 years ago. in fact I have to give him credit for me even starting off getting into Pentax equipment. He did like a one hour overview tutorial of the K-S2 and I watch it a zillion times.
I've always taken his subjective comments as exactly that - subjective.

But lately it's just getting way outta scope. Click bait... absolutism, tribalism.. I've stopped watching his videos.

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 11:49 AM ----------

The whole "Is Your Camera Brand Failing" or whatever video was straight up cringe.
And he did a joke of a job covering Pentax history video.

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 11:54 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by OoKU Quote
APSC 16-50/2.8
I think I'll end up buying this when it's released.
It'd replace my 18-135mm. I would miss the reach however.
I wouldn't miss the zoom creep though.
Very exciting to have more PLM coming up!
09-26-2020, 11:21 AM - 2 Likes   #103
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 36,214
QuoteOriginally posted by FozzFoster Quote
But lately it's just getting way outta scope. Click bait... absolutism, tribalism.. I've stopped watching his videos.
Sad, I can't honestly say I've learned nothing from it, even if most of it was research undertaken because I knew he was wrong, but couldn't express why. But, you know what he thinks, and if you stick with that and understand you might not think that way, he can be informative to a degree, and also amusing to a degree.

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 02:26 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
Depends on what you intend to shoot. The 1:3 max magnification of the 70-210/4 is where I personally consider it "macro" already.

Remember that 1:3 means that on a 36mm wide FF sensor you'll be able to completely fill the frame with a subject that is just about 10 cm wide (3x 3,6xm). For flowers and dragonflies that should be good enough for many.

My personal favorite "macro" lens alway was the DA*300/4 plus TC.

---------- Post added 26th Sep 2020 at 19:02 ----------



Rondec already linked to my old table, so here it is again for those who don't want to follow links:

I wish it has the Angle of the Field of View on it. (24mm equivalent)



This has similar magnification at a short distance


I much prefer the limited field of view in the second, (100mm) based on FoV and Depth of Field, even though the magnification may be pretty close.
Quality of bokeh is also a factor that needs to be considered when composing the image. I know shooting 24mm, I better have a pleasing background.

Last edited by normhead; 09-27-2020 at 11:13 AM.
09-26-2020, 11:29 AM   #104
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,821
So, if people are going for long lens with high magnification. Why would anyone choose DFA *70-200 or any other in that league. It is not made for that. If I want to loisen a bolt or tighten it I will use the most appropriate tool for it. If I know at the morning, that I want to shoot macro/details in my work or I’m looking for lets say butterfly. I would not pack my DFA*70-200 with me. First of all it isnot that small. It does take place for dedicated macro and a prime lens. Or macro and 28-105. Or... if I want something else like portraits. Or more tight scenery shots or that f2.8 at whole zoom range. I’ll lug it around, and propably will use it for whole time. Unless I need close up shots. Or wide. Or fast 55 or 31. Or.. just saying. It is good to have that 70-210/4. At first I thought I’d be going for that to get closer up shots an more walkabout lens for tightlandscape shots I want. Now I know I want 70-300 for that AND 100 or 150 mm macro IF I want longer reach than DFA50/2,8 macro. Which I really do like for many reasons.
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!
85mm, barrier, blog, dust, expression, feedback, focus, force, hockey, images, issue, issues multiple lens, jump, lens, lens design, lenses, northrup, notice, pentax issues, pentax news, pentax rumors, perception, photographer, photographers, photography, post, rentals, shooter, situations, video output
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is the D FA* 50/1.4 a Pentax/ Ricoh design or a Tokina design? Wheatfield Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 60 06-28-2020 03:15 PM
Pentax 60mm f2.8 FF(35mm) + 90mm f2.8 (645) Macro lens patents Steelski Pentax News and Rumors 43 03-15-2012 08:16 AM
FA Limited lens series won the 2010 Good Design Long Life Design Award Patriot Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 26 11-29-2010 06:16 AM
multiple multiple exposure Donald Post Your Photos! 6 05-17-2007 07:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:55 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