Sharpest Pentax Lens; Samyang 135mm f2 lens

normhead · 01-22-2017, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by civiletti

Not everything, just this, which makes no sense to me at this point.

The biggest factor in most images for IQ is the quality of the raw file.
In my experience, if I don't see the quality I want in the raw it's not going to be in the finall file, or print.

Can you use post processing to duplicate that? I guess if you're a painter type person, you can create anything from scratch, you don't even need a raw file, just a Photoshop canvas.

But since you say you can do it... how do you create an image like this by blurring an image? It isn't blurry. It's sharp at the pixel level. The dreaminess is something else.

There are occasions, like this one , where I just reach for this lens, because it's going to give me something others don't. It's not the sharpest, but I'll take sharper lenses, like the Tamron 17-50 or DA 18-135 off the camera because of the way the 21 ltd renders it's images.

DA 21 ltd.

The 18-135 at 24mm

The 18-135 is sharper, the 21 td is better, for this type of image. I always take the 18-135 off for the 21 in it's range. I don't believe you can evaluate lenses from test chart comparisons. I believe you have to use the lens and understand it's qualities.

From what I've seen the 31 and 77 would be the same.

Darn, sucked in again.

Last edited by normhead; 01-22-2017 at 11:37 AM.

civiletti · 01-22-2017, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by lithedreamer

With wide-aperture lenses, the quality of the bokeh is important for portraits and any background blurring task. What you were saying about PP noise reduction, is just overdoing noise reduction on an image, destroying fine details everywhere. I posted this earlier, but it's a good example:

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/557/31169371310_1358113357_o_d.jpg

The leaves and bud in focus are nice and sharp, but if you scroll over to the background, it's smooth and relatively undistracting. That couldn't easily be done with noise reduction unless applied selectively (if you had jagged bokeh). You'd have to do it to every image, which would be a huge pain.

So we are talking about bokeh, not the characteristics of in-focus areas of an image?

---------- Post added 01-22-17 at 01:37 PM ----------

Originally posted by normhead

The biggest factor in most images for IQ is the quality of the raw file.
In my experience, if I don't see the quality I want in the raw it's not going to be in the finall file, or print.

Can you use post processing to duplicate that? I guess if you're a painter type person, you can create anything from scratch, you don't even need a raw file, just a Photoshop canvas.

But since you say you can do it... how do you create an image like this by blurring an image? It isn't blurry. It's sharp at the pixel level. The dreaminess is something else.

There are occasions, like this one , where I just reach for this lens, because it's going to give me something others don't. It's not the sharpest, but I'll take sharper lenses, like the Tamron 17-50 or DA 18-135 off the camera because of the way the 21 ltd renders it's images.

DA 21 ltd.

The 18-135 at 24mm

The 18-135 is sharper, the 21 td is better, for this type of image. I always take the 18-135 off for the 21 in it's range. I don't believe you can evaluate lenses from test chart comparisons. I believe you have to use the lens and understand it's qualities.

From what I've seen the 31 and 77 would be the same.

Darn, sucked in again.

Perhaps my eyes are not up to snuff. I do not see what makes that image dreamy. Would the same scene in the same lighting taken through a different lens be undreamy? It seems to me that any characteristic that a lens lends an image should be able to be described using measurable optical terms like resolution, contrast, micro-contrast, diffusion, circle of confusion, etc.

**Digitalis** · 01-22-2017, 04:58 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by pres589

That sounds like something benefiting its own thread with details on the swap

I'll post a review once the mechanical aspects of the conversion are complete.

Greg1956 · 01-23-2017, 07:49 PM

Hi Digitalis,

I've never heard of B&M stores, are they local or interstate?? What is there full name?

Greg
Adelaide

cali92rs · 01-23-2017, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by Greg1956

Hi Digitalis,

I've never heard of B&M stores, are they local or interstate?? What is there full name?

Greg
Adelaide

B&M refers to "brick & mortar" stores, a place where you can actually touch the hardware....as opposed to online marketplaces like amazon.

Greg1956 · 01-24-2017, 12:42 AM

ok,

thanks for that,

Greg

englishphotographer · 03-22-2017, 10:45 AM

I have the Sigma 35mm f1.4 art lens and while they're not directly comparable, it's definitely a sharp lens. Even wide open it is special. The Samyang is still better but the Sigma is certainly nice.

**Kerrowdown** · 03-25-2017, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by English-Photographer

Sharpest Pentax Lens

For me "sharpest" is not always what my photography is about... it's only one of the many contributing factors, so I try not to get too wrapped around the axle with it.

englishphotographer · 03-25-2017, 03:07 PM

I suppose for me part of it is ego bragging rights, part is seeing what the world looks like when photographed because the camera and lens combination has higher resolution than my eyes, and part is because I am only after a few photographs now and I want them to have as high a quality as possible.

rawr · 03-25-2017, 10:09 PM

Always worth noting in these sharpness discussions: the slightest amount of camera, lens, and/or subject motion blur makes assessment of lens resolution VERY challenging. More relevant at 36MP than ever.

Lens resolution measurement on an optical bench: OK. In the field: probably unrealistic.

k1man · 03-28-2017, 05:33 PM

just gonna wait and see what pentax bring out in the future hopefully a 135mm as they are building up there lens line bit by bit

**ivanvernon** · 03-28-2017, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by English-Photographer

I have the Dfa 50mm and it's not really sharp. The 100mm might be special. Haven't seen...

If your D FA 50mm f 2.8 is not sharp, there must be something wrong with your copy. Numerous sharpness tests show extremely high level of resolution for this lens, the sharpest or at least near sharpest Pentax has ever made.

Stavri · 03-28-2017, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by ivanvernon

If your D FA 50mm f 2.8 is not sharp, there must be something wrong with your copy. Numerous sharpness tests show extremely high level of resolution for this lens, the sharpest or at least near sharpest Pentax has ever made.

As sharp as the Sigma 70mm f2.8 Macro in my experience, with better contrast at large apertures.

**clackers** · 03-28-2017, 08:08 PM

Originally posted by ivanvernon

If your D FA 50mm f 2.8 is not sharp, there must be something wrong with your copy. Numerous sharpness tests show extremely high level of resolution for this lens, the sharpest or at least near sharpest Pentax has ever made.

I agree, Ivan, I took the following SOOC at the weekend with the 50mm Macro. The second is a crop of the first just to show there's so much detail there, post processing will be needed to smooth it out.

**ivanvernon** · 03-29-2017, 02:56 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by clackers

I agree, Ivan, I took the following SOOC at the weekend with the 50mm Macro. The second is a crop of the first just to show there's so much detail there, post processing will be needed to smooth it out.

Now that is one sharp portrait, making me wonder why you chose this particular lens for a portrait. I have heard that some ladies cover their faces when they see a photographer with this lens! Beautiful model, but something about her aura tells me that she definitely has a mind of her own. Perhaps you will wish to do PP before displaying this photo to her!

01-23-2017, 07:49 PM	#34
Greg1956 Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 76	Sharpest lenses Hi Digitalis, I've never heard of B&M stores, are they local or interstate?? What is there full name? Greg Adelaide

01-24-2017, 12:42 AM	#36
Greg1956 Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 76	B&M stores ok, thanks for that, Greg

03-28-2017, 08:08 PM	#44
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by ivanvernon If your D FA 50mm f 2.8 is not sharp, there must be something wrong with your copy. Numerous sharpness tests show extremely high level of resolution for this lens, the sharpest or at least near sharpest Pentax has ever made. I agree, Ivan, I took the following SOOC at the weekend with the 50mm Macro. The second is a crop of the first just to show there's so much detail there, post processing will be needed to smooth it out. Last edited by clackers; 03-28-2017 at 08:18 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC FA 50mm Macro Lens - (The Sharpest?)	SparkTronic	Sold Items	2	04-09-2016 04:51 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax's Sharpest Lens & Pentax's Softest Lens - 2 for 1 price!	Fenwoodian	Sold Items	3	12-14-2015 10:35 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA* 50-135mm F2.8 lens, fantastic condition	JayR	Sold Items	10	10-09-2015 04:00 AM
Lens Tournament: DA* 50-135mm F2.4 vs K 135mm F2.5	Adam	Pentax Forums Giveaways	16	10-24-2014 02:45 PM
The XR Rikenon 50mm f2 sharpest 35mm lens claim	K-9	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	33	08-13-2012 06:20 AM

01-22-2017, 10:18 AM	#31
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by civiletti Not everything, just this, which makes no sense to me at this point. The biggest factor in most images for IQ is the quality of the raw file. In my experience, if I don't see the quality I want in the raw it's not going to be in the finall file, or print. Can you use post processing to duplicate that? I guess if you're a painter type person, you can create anything from scratch, you don't even need a raw file, just a Photoshop canvas. But since you say you can do it... how do you create an image like this by blurring an image? It isn't blurry. It's sharp at the pixel level. The dreaminess is something else. There are occasions, like this one , where I just reach for this lens, because it's going to give me something others don't. It's not the sharpest, but I'll take sharper lenses, like the Tamron 17-50 or DA 18-135 off the camera because of the way the 21 ltd renders it's images. DA 21 ltd. The 18-135 at 24mm The 18-135 is sharper, the 21 td is better, for this type of image. I always take the 18-135 off for the 21 in it's range. I don't believe you can evaluate lenses from test chart comparisons. I believe you have to use the lens and understand it's qualities. From what I've seen the 31 and 77 would be the same. Darn, sucked in again. Last edited by normhead; 01-22-2017 at 11:37 AM.

01-22-2017, 02:29 PM	#32
civiletti Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 1,435	Originally posted by lithedreamer With wide-aperture lenses, the quality of the bokeh is important for portraits and any background blurring task. What you were saying about PP noise reduction, is just overdoing noise reduction on an image, destroying fine details everywhere. I posted this earlier, but it's a good example: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/557/31169371310_1358113357_o_d.jpg The leaves and bud in focus are nice and sharp, but if you scroll over to the background, it's smooth and relatively undistracting. That couldn't easily be done with noise reduction unless applied selectively (if you had jagged bokeh). You'd have to do it to every image, which would be a huge pain. So we are talking about bokeh, not the characteristics of in-focus areas of an image? ---------- Post added 01-22-17 at 01:37 PM ---------- Originally posted by normhead The biggest factor in most images for IQ is the quality of the raw file. In my experience, if I don't see the quality I want in the raw it's not going to be in the finall file, or print. Can you use post processing to duplicate that? I guess if you're a painter type person, you can create anything from scratch, you don't even need a raw file, just a Photoshop canvas. But since you say you can do it... how do you create an image like this by blurring an image? It isn't blurry. It's sharp at the pixel level. The dreaminess is something else. There are occasions, like this one , where I just reach for this lens, because it's going to give me something others don't. It's not the sharpest, but I'll take sharper lenses, like the Tamron 17-50 or DA 18-135 off the camera because of the way the 21 ltd renders it's images. DA 21 ltd. The 18-135 at 24mm The 18-135 is sharper, the 21 td is better, for this type of image. I always take the 18-135 off for the 21 in it's range. I don't believe you can evaluate lenses from test chart comparisons. I believe you have to use the lens and understand it's qualities. From what I've seen the 31 and 77 would be the same. Darn, sucked in again. Perhaps my eyes are not up to snuff. I do not see what makes that image dreamy. Would the same scene in the same lighting taken through a different lens be undreamy? It seems to me that any characteristic that a lens lends an image should be able to be described using measurable optical terms like resolution, contrast, micro-contrast, diffusion, circle of confusion, etc.

01-22-2017, 04:58 PM - 2 Likes	#33
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by pres589 That sounds like something benefiting its own thread with details on the swap I'll post a review once the mechanical aspects of the conversion are complete.

01-23-2017, 09:43 PM	#35
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Greg1956 Hi Digitalis, I've never heard of B&M stores, are they local or interstate?? What is there full name? Greg Adelaide B&M refers to "brick & mortar" stores, a place where you can actually touch the hardware....as opposed to online marketplaces like amazon.

03-22-2017, 10:45 AM	#37
englishphotographer Forum Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 76	I have the Sigma 35mm f1.4 art lens and while they're not directly comparable, it's definitely a sharp lens. Even wide open it is special. The Samyang is still better but the Sigma is certainly nice.

03-25-2017, 02:46 PM	#38
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	Originally posted by English-Photographer Sharpest Pentax Lens For me "sharpest" is not always what my photography is about... it's only one of the many contributing factors, so I try not to get too wrapped around the axle with it.

03-25-2017, 03:07 PM	#39
englishphotographer Forum Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 76	I suppose for me part of it is ego bragging rights, part is seeing what the world looks like when photographed because the camera and lens combination has higher resolution than my eyes, and part is because I am only after a few photographs now and I want them to have as high a quality as possible.

03-25-2017, 10:09 PM	#40
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Always worth noting in these sharpness discussions: the slightest amount of camera, lens, and/or subject motion blur makes assessment of lens resolution VERY challenging. More relevant at 36MP than ever. Lens resolution measurement on an optical bench: OK. In the field: probably unrealistic.

03-28-2017, 05:33 PM	#41
k1man Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2017 Location: Si Chiang Mai. Nong Khai Province Photos: Albums Posts: 358	just gonna wait and see what pentax bring out in the future hopefully a 135mm as they are building up there lens line bit by bit

03-28-2017, 05:40 PM	#42
ivanvernon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Medina, OH Photos: Albums Posts: 7,224	Originally posted by English-Photographer I have the Dfa 50mm and it's not really sharp. The 100mm might be special. Haven't seen... If your D FA 50mm f 2.8 is not sharp, there must be something wrong with your copy. Numerous sharpness tests show extremely high level of resolution for this lens, the sharpest or at least near sharpest Pentax has ever made.

03-28-2017, 06:28 PM	#43
Stavri Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: at a Bean & Leaf Photos: Albums Posts: 1,832	Originally posted by ivanvernon If your D FA 50mm f 2.8 is not sharp, there must be something wrong with your copy. Numerous sharpness tests show extremely high level of resolution for this lens, the sharpest or at least near sharpest Pentax has ever made. As sharp as the Sigma 70mm f2.8 Macro in my experience, with better contrast at large apertures.

03-29-2017, 02:56 AM - 1 Like	#45
ivanvernon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Medina, OH Photos: Albums Posts: 7,224	Originally posted by clackers I agree, Ivan, I took the following SOOC at the weekend with the 50mm Macro. The second is a crop of the first just to show there's so much detail there, post processing will be needed to smooth it out. Now that is one sharp portrait, making me wonder why you chose this particular lens for a portrait. I have heard that some ladies cover their faces when they see a photographer with this lens! Beautiful model, but something about her aura tells me that she definitely has a mind of her own. Perhaps you will wish to do PP before displaying this photo to her!