Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-22-2013, 10:52 AM   #1351
Veteran Member
bimjo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pasco, WA
Posts: 967
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
It seems to be a great lens, but considering the price they command, it would be hard not to sell it and pick up another of the CSV primes you've been collecting, eh?
True, very true.

I really do need to get off my posterior and get some stuff listed. It's a shame to let it just sit here unused.

03-23-2013, 06:39 PM   #1352
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
Canon FD 85/1.2
























Last edited by kenafein; 03-23-2013 at 08:13 PM.
03-24-2013, 06:41 PM   #1353
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,072

03-25-2013, 07:24 PM - 2 Likes   #1354
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,456
Excuse the low light...I'm glad I jumped in the car after work and went for a look:
(Near Gargrave, UK).

To the hills!






03-25-2013, 07:37 PM   #1355
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by Clarkey Quote
Excuse the low light...I'm glad I jumped in the car after work and went for a look:
(Near Gargrave, UK).

To the hills!



Some nice roads and stone walls. You have a lot of really good shots in your photostream.
03-25-2013, 07:38 PM   #1356
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
Almost seems wider than 18.
03-26-2013, 07:15 AM   #1357
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,072
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
Almost seems wider than 18.
Well, sure, it is a pano.

03-26-2013, 07:41 AM   #1358
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
Well, sure, it is a pano.
I was thinking wider than 18 because it seemed like there was some UWA distortion. Looking at the larger size I can see the NEX stitching booboos. It's a nice camera feature, but it's not quite as clean as Emacs painstaking stitches(but no tripod needed). Still, it's nice when you don't peep.
03-26-2013, 06:10 PM   #1359
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,456
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
Some nice roads and stone walls. You have a lot of really good shots in your photostream.
Many thanks for the kind words! I enjoy this type of travel and photography.
03-28-2013, 07:09 PM - 2 Likes   #1360
Veteran Member
bimjo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pasco, WA
Posts: 967
Couple random shots. First is from the night bridge shoot 2 weeks ago. M-Rokkor 90 @ f/4



And one from this evening with the Contax 28-85 @ f/5.6 and 85mm. Vignette added in post.

03-29-2013, 09:16 AM   #1361
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by bimjo Quote
Couple random shots. First is from the night bridge shoot 2 weeks ago. M-Rokkor 90 @ f/4



And one from this evening with the Contax 28-85 @ f/5.6 and 85mm. Vignette added in post.
I really like the second shot. It would make a great desktop background. You said you had the vario-sonnar I just assumed it was the 35-70. I didn't know about the 28-85. It looks like a good lens, with some added utility. Still, I've seen similar quality shots from you out of the kit lens, so maybe it's just you.
03-29-2013, 09:35 AM   #1362
Veteran Member
bimjo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pasco, WA
Posts: 967
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
I really like the second shot. It would make a great desktop background. You said you had the vario-sonnar I just assumed it was the 35-70. I didn't know about the 28-85. It looks like a good lens, with some added utility. Still, I've seen similar quality shots from you out of the kit lens, so maybe it's just you.
Thanks, but you have to remember that Photoshop is your friend.

The 35-70 would be a little less wieldy than the 28-85, but the range is nice. This one was actually hand-held, which I almost never do on closeups because I can't hold myself still, so it's ok web sized, doesn't hold up bigger.

I need to shoot more with this lens to decide if I'm going to keep it or not. I'm leaning toward not, but that could change as I use it more.
03-29-2013, 02:05 PM   #1363
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
Have any of you, that own the viewfinder, noticed that the focus peaking is much less pronounced when looking through the viewfinder than looking at the screen. It's not something I noticed before, but I noticed it recently while shooting with my 85/1.2 and my 135/2. Now I can't help but notice that it is dramatically different. I just checked with my 55/2 Tak today. Does it have anything to do with the contrast? I wouldn't have thought that would matter to the display, only what the sensor detected.
03-29-2013, 03:34 PM   #1364
Veteran Member
bimjo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pasco, WA
Posts: 967
Yes, it's a pretty pronounced difference. I think it's a combination of the contrast of the lens itself and the resolution difference of the EVF vs. the LCD that causes it.

I've found that bumping the peaking level up to the highest setting helps, as does playing with the contrast level settings for jpegs (I shoot RAW exclusively).

For RAW it also helps to shoot in B&W mode. The preview shots are B&W, but the RAW files obviously aren't affected. Magnified view sometimes also helps things. It's sort of hit-or-miss unfortunately.
03-29-2013, 03:43 PM   #1365
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by bimjo Quote
Yes, it's a pretty pronounced difference. I think it's a combination of the contrast of the lens itself and the resolution difference of the EVF vs. the LCD that causes it.

I've found that bumping the peaking level up to the highest setting helps, as does playing with the contrast level settings for jpegs (I shoot RAW exclusively).

For RAW it also helps to shoot in B&W mode. The preview shots are B&W, but the RAW files obviously aren't affected. Magnified view sometimes also helps things. It's sort of hit-or-miss unfortunately.
Good tips, I did try the black and white thing earlier after running across a thread on another forum. I will try bumbing the peaking level. I still get a high percentage of keepers, but increased speed always nets more opportunities.
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!
beauty, camera, cheers, crop, dslr, f3.8, flickr, frame, hong, images, iraq, iso, jpegs, kiron, kong, leica, lenses, macro, max, nex, nex-5r, pano, post, quality, reasons, shot, sigma, time, vivitar, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:34 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