Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-01-2016, 08:35 PM - 1 Like   #31
Site Supporter
BigDave's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,433
QuoteOriginally posted by Big Dawg Quote
As a young man in the 1960's, I was not able to afford good cameras or lens. Those adds in the photo magazines at the doctor's office were enticing to say the least, but they (cameras and lens) cost so much and were beyond my reach. Then in the late 1970's my wife saved up enough money to buy me a K1000 with a 50mm kit lens and a Sear's brand 135mm tele for Christmas. My dream had come true....partially anyway. There were still all those adds for those exotic (to me anyway) 70-210 zooms and those nice 24mm,28mm and 35mm wide angle lens. I had no idea what a macro was so they didn't matter but those zooms......Man, I dreamed of a zoom!

So I finally in the early 2000's I was able to step up to digital. Got a Kodak DX6490 and loved it. But even though it had a built in 10X zoom it didn't have the interchangeability I was used to. At 4 MP's it did not overwhelm. I stayed with this for several years till Pentax came out with my dream camera....The K10D! I was now, since my children had all grown up and moved out ( Dad always said "You never know how much money you have till the Kids leave home and the Dog dies." He was right.) able to afford this dream camera. NOW... NOW... I can buy and use those exotic Zooms That I always dreamed of. So I bought and tried around 250 different zoom lens in a large number of focal lengths and brands. They just did not seem to work with the K10D. Being a crop camera these popular (for film camera days) just didn't excite me as they did on my K1000 or Spotmatic.. Then there were those primes that I liked and those I had always longed for. Those 24mm 28mm and 35mm wide angle lens were not wide angle. They just didn't work as well as I had hoped. I bought and tried over 100 of those. They, during this time, having fallen somewhat out of favor were quite cheap on Ebay and I had enough money just from my daily lunch money to buy lots and try them out. 135mm? It was now the equivalent of a 200mm. Not a portrait lens any more. They were selling for peanuts on Ebay and at one time I had over 30 in my collection. None of the 135mm lens excited or gave me that much pleasure. that focal length that was so popular in my 35mm film days just was not what I liked with an APS-C sensor camera.

The K1 is now causing those Zooms and those 35mm popular focal lengths to escalate in price on Ebay and other auction sites. They were made to work well with a Full Frame sensor. I look forward to trying them and now finally use them as I once imagined doing. I know it sounds silly to the millennial crowed but I was married at 17, actually was working for a living at 16. Had 3 kids before I was 21 and have remained married to the same woman for 49 years. I was one of the working poor for nearly 30 years and now retired I can fulfill some of my fantasies from those days where working two 8 hour shifts a day during the week and working a 12 hour shift on the weekends I could only dream of owning a good camera and these fantasy lens of mine.

The K1 will liberate those old popular focal lengths........................Won't it?

From earlier days, a tiny part of what I had collected. I still have some of these.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-1/315334-k-1-wildlife-birding-2.html
BD- Congrats on making it this far! And with one wife, that is awesome! You deserve a nice 150-500 for a bonus.

But seriously, although I know newer lenses have been designed with the digital sensors in mind, I have been using the older FF lenses (older adaptamatic tamrons, Pentax A and Sigma) on my K7 and they have worked quite nicely. I look forward to having the FF sensor for the resolution and lack of the anti aliasing screen for the sharpness. I even have some old screw mount lenses and an A bellows for macro (they REALLY work well)! This year I can look forward to April, instead of just dreading the tax bill coming up! I hope you can do the same!

04-01-2016, 09:17 PM   #32
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,158
QuoteOriginally posted by npc Quote
There's no reason to do that (open to focus...stop down to meter/shoot) on an A7 - EVFs don't not get darker if you stop down (ok, if it is _really_ dark and you stop down, then the EVF's refresh rate might drop to some annoying level)
Ummmm...the issue is not brightness. The issue is focus precision. Stopped down, the image on the focus screen or EVF is bound by the same rules for DOF as the final image and the plane of focus is difficult to determine. The same issue also affects focus confirmation with manual focus lenses. Magnification helps some, but is not a panacea. Back in the day, much of the rational behind owning faster glass was that nailing focus is much easier when you can see what is not in focus. For that the lens needs to be both fairly fast and wide open.

There is a reason why automatic aperture (actuation) was a huge selling point* for SLR lenses in the 60s until the feature became virtually ubiquitous in the mid-70s. Once the aperture was set, you were free to not touch that ring and shoot at will, refocusing as needed between shots, until the light or the subject changed. I shoot an assortment of vintage lenses on both digital and film SLRs and unless I need a particular look, the option for auto aperture wins out every time, even on meterless cameras.


Steve

* That is why it is not uncommon to see lenses from the period prominently labeled as "Auto Somethingar" or similar. On my shelf, I have two Auto Rikenons , an Auto Mamiya/Sekor, and an Auto Focal. Lack of the designation (in name or description) would generally mean a pre-set aperture mechanism or on some specialty lenses, fully manual aperture. Almost all Asahi Optical Company and Pentax lenses since about 1960 have automatic apertures.

Last edited by stevebrot; 04-01-2016 at 09:42 PM.
04-02-2016, 01:15 AM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,492
QuoteOriginally posted by npc Quote
There's no reason to do that (open to focus...stop down to meter/shoot) on an A7 - EVFs don't not get darker if you stop down (ok, if it is _really_ dark and you stop down, then the EVF's refresh rate might drop to some annoying level)
I thought critical focus was best if focus is achieved via open rather than stopped down aperture.
04-02-2016, 01:32 AM   #34
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,678
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
I thought critical focus was best if focus is achieved via open rather than stopped down aperture.
Yep, if you shoot at f8 the PD AF points won't work reliably, it'll be up to the slow Contrast Detection points which mirrorless cameras are trying to wean themselves off.

04-02-2016, 04:29 AM   #35
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,428
There are mirrorlless guys who learned on film cameras and made a rational decision to forego the mirror, full-well knowing the trade-offs.

Then there are Mirrorless guys.
04-02-2016, 04:37 AM   #36
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,144
QuoteOriginally posted by Tan68 Quote
Changed your favorite lenses and I figure you mean focal length
But did your favored fields of view change..?
Yeah, I didn't phrase that quite right. I meant that some of my lenses that I hadn't used that much on film, I suddenly started using a lot on APS-C...and that was due to the change in field of view. Specifically, my 35-105mm was a lens that I only used sparingly on film because I don't shoot a lot of things in that range. I'm usually shooting wider or more telephoto. But on APS-C, it became my favorite lens because now it fit my "eye" better.
04-02-2016, 05:22 AM   #37
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,779
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
There are mirrorlless guys who learned on film cameras and made a rational decision to forego the mirror, full-well knowing the trade-offs.

Then there are Mirrorless guys.
Very astute. I agree completely.

That being said, I was briefly tempted by the siren call of Olympus micro 4/3 as a supplement to DSLR (as a compact casual travel snaps platform). Then I fell in love with film again and acquired an ME, and that was the end of that.

Do remember, however, that film rangefinder is also a mirrorless system. (And yes, that comes with its own tradeoffs.)
04-02-2016, 05:59 AM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 841
Interesting read, actually the 24 and 135 that I have gets more use on my K-digital bodies (currently the K-S2 and K-x) than they did on my 24x36 film SLR's...
I always loved the FA 135 f/2.8 but on my MZ-5N it simply seemed a little bit too wide but on my APS-C it all comes together somehow...

Sure the K-1 will give new life and interest to typical 24x36 focal lengths, I'm sure...

04-02-2016, 07:22 AM   #39
Veteran Member
Tan68's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 396
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Very astute. I agree completely.

That being said, I was briefly tempted by the siren call of Olympus micro 4/3 as a supplement to DSLR (as a compact casual travel snaps platform). ...
I may be a mirrorless fellow...

I also don't use my dSLR for travel snaps. I pull it out when I want to make a photograph. So, I use a canon SX230 p/s for documentary pics. Sometimes, I would like to have a little better quality for subjects that don't feel right for the SLR. So, rather than Sony 1" or LX100, I bought an Olympus LX-6.

With its collapsible kit lens, it is no larger than an LX100. I bought a tiny Rokinon 7.5mm fisheye. This lens is much smaller & lighter than others for larger formats. I feel these two lenses play to the strengths of the format and I look at it as upgrade to a point/shoot.
04-02-2016, 09:23 PM - 2 Likes   #40
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Big Dawg Quote
... I was one of the working poor for nearly 30 years and now retired I can fulfill some of my fantasies from those days where working two 8 hour shifts a day during the week and working a 12 hour shift on the weekends I could only dream of owning a good camera and these fantasy lens of mine.
I like hearing this, because growing up, a 35mm camera and lens kit wasn't a trivial purchase among my family or even in my greater community - you were either 'rich' or an obsessive hobbyist if you had a 35mm camera. Being a participant in a forum of enthusiasts for the past 9 years has made question my own experience at times... like maybe I had it wrong. It's nice to see people who have a shared appreciation for the relative rarity of our hobby, and a big reason for that rarity is cost, if we're being honest.

QuoteQuote:
The K1 will liberate those old popular focal lengths........................Won't it?
Yes. Or to put it another way, it will allow a new avenue of appreciation that's really a walk down an old avenue.

.
04-05-2016, 01:02 PM   #41
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
I thought critical focus was best if focus is achieved via open rather than stopped down aperture.
that would depend on the lens, because if there is a focus shift problem, like with so many of the old 50/1.4 taks, you won't have optimal focus after stopping down.

this is not low-rez film, it's a 36mp sensor, at 100% you'll see every defect.
04-05-2016, 01:19 PM   #42
Veteran Member
i5_david's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 331
I am struggling with this: "this is not low-rez film"... this dude states that a comparison with film would be a 156 megapixel sensor. If this is right we shouldn't worry about the old lenses, shouldn't we? At least in a practical way of using them in printwork and not on a pixel peeping dimension.
04-05-2016, 01:52 PM - 1 Like   #43
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,096
QuoteOriginally posted by tvdtvdtvd Quote
I'm excited to have a 28mm feel wide again. That is definitely the one FL that has never felt right on APS-C. Second to that,
it will be nice for a 50mm to once again be 'normal'.

Short answer is "Yes!", the old standards will be more at home on FF than on APS-C, particularly if you became familiar with
those focal lengths on 35mm film in the first place.
Yet was there not a 43mm FA lens whereas a 28 would on APS-C would be like a 42 in fl. Some one must of thought it was a good focal length

I never understood the awkward focal lenght on any format. That is the reason that a company makes multiple focal lengths When I put the 28 or 35 or 50 or even 70 mm on either the K5IIs or the MZ7 I know that they are different on each camera but I start looking for shots that match the lens on the camera and none of those focal lengths seem wrong on either camera. I do understand that there were gaps and the closest Pentax had to the 28 was the 21 which would be more similar to the 31 Ltd
04-05-2016, 03:08 PM   #44
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,492
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
Yet was there not a 43mm FA lens whereas a 28 would on APS-C would be like a 42 in fl. Some one must of thought it was a good focal length

I never understood the awkward focal lenght on any format. That is the reason that a company makes multiple focal lengths When I put the 28 or 35 or 50 or even 70 mm on either the K5IIs or the MZ7 I know that they are different on each camera but I start looking for shots that match the lens on the camera and none of those focal lengths seem wrong on either camera. I do understand that there were gaps and the closest Pentax had to the 28 was the 21 which would be more similar to the 31 Ltd

Amen. I think some people have a very specific idea of how they want to see the world with a camera. Some people take a perspective gov and get tightly coupled to it in their creative process. Me I'm more of a look at that neat view, and Then adapt and find shots that work within that lenses ability.
04-05-2016, 07:26 PM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gabriola Island
Posts: 579
QuoteOriginally posted by i5_david Quote
I am struggling with this: "this is not low-rez film"... this dude states that a comparison with film would be a 156 megapixel sensor. If this is right we shouldn't worry about the old lenses, shouldn't we? At least in a practical way of using them in printwork and not on a pixel peeping dimension.
Having worked with film for over 40 years and digital for over 20 years, I can tell you that "this dude" is spouting nonsense. For some strange reason I would not rely on a single unverified source on the Internet. On technical issues I always check several sources and investigate their credibility. Where possible, I prefer to refer to books by credible authors.

For a more realistic discussion, see this:
The Online Photographer: When Will Micro 4/3 Equal Medium-Format Film? We Have the Definitive Answer

There is also this article, which I find corresponds well with my test results when I was researching FF DSLRs for work in the early 2000's (ended up with a Kodak DCS 14n Pro):
http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html

Based on actual experience, I know that many film-era lenses will produce fine results on FF 36MP. I'm looking forward to seeing results with older Pentax lenses on a sensor optimized for the Pentax registration distance.

Last edited by John Poirier; 04-05-2016 at 07:43 PM.
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!
angle, aperture, aps-c, camera, dream, dslr, ebay, ff, film, flops, full frame, full-frame, k-1, k1, lengths, lens, lenses, money, pentax k-1
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To K1 or not K1 - that is the question? interested_observer Pentax K-1 52 06-25-2016 11:05 PM
Will the new Pentax K1 FF be DOA?? Shanti Pentax Full Frame 87 02-17-2016 06:42 PM
How precise does input focal length have to be so that SR will work? Antonio Marques Pentax Q 5 12-15-2014 07:58 AM
Has It Been Confirmed That The K-3 Will Accept UHS-I...? tabl10s Pentax K-3 11 10-20-2013 12:21 PM
Will the K-5 AF breath new life into AF TC? JohnBee Pentax K-5 17 09-28-2010 10:26 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:22 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