|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
07-04-2013, 01:25 AM
|
| |
I want one!!!
That is uber cool
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-26-2012, 11:19 AM
|
| |
The camera in the first patent looks like an MZ-5 with an FA 24mm f2 . Maybe a case of reusing them using camera design template or a case of me having a pareidolia.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
06-23-2012, 11:42 AM
|
| |
Thanks Rondec, you explained quite succinctly what I was trying to say.
@cali92rs
Just to repeat my point:
I'm referring to the wide-end. I don't give a flying fish about the 50mm difference at the long end. Even if I do, using your logic, I can easily get a 1.4x tc and still come out ahead.
The truth of the matter is that though both Nikon and Canon has apsc sensor camera, their high-grade lens-lineup for apsc sensor is not complete and inadequate for now. What people don't realise is that the full-frame lens that both have(which I suspect that both are trying do a coverup), have gaps within their range for apsc. (In fact with Canon's 1.6 multiplier, it gets even trickier). Their full-frame lineup is par excellent of course but we're not talking about full-frame here aren't we? Since Pentax doesn't have a full-frame camera currently. Comparing the lens just like that is like comparing apples and oranges. And this just confuses noobs even further.
To add to my point about lens-lineup above, the only camera maker that has a wonderful and exquisite lens lineup for the smaller format is Olympus four-third (though their micro four-third offering is catching up really fast) (and the their lens cost even more). It is quite sad that they don't seem interested to move forward with a new model after the E-5. I often look at their swd lens with envy .....sigh.....
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
06-22-2012, 07:44 PM
|
| |
And both are not equivalent to the Pentax 60-250mm aren't they?
Pentax got them both beaten for range and at least 1 of them for weather proofing.
For that matter it should be the Canon 70-200mm f4 L IS that should be used for the comparison. And lets add the Tamron into the mix the 70-200mm f2.8 shall we? Good optics, good price but slow af, only using screw drive, no weather proofing and smaller range. And how about Nikon's 70-200 f2.8 lens? My, my will you take a look at that;
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Lens 2185 B&H Photo
Pentax Zoom Telephoto 60-250mm f/4 ED DA* SDM Autofocus Lens
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM Lens 1258B002 B&H Photo Video
hmmmm...........wow, would you look at that?
If you google harder, I'm very sure, you can get better deals for the Pentax as well.
And also ignore the fact that the lens sold by third-party lens makers have always been historically cheaper? If it was more expensive, nobody would buy them unless they provide a specific need or performance (Carl Zeiss anyone?). Nobody is stopping anybody from buying from Sigma or Tamron or others. In fact when I started photography like 20 years(yeah I know, still a baby compared to some) it was understood that if you can't afford the original camera-maker lens, you'd buy the third-party ones. I don't remember people belly-aching then.
Lets take a look at it at another angle shall we? I'll make the maths simple.
At the shortest zoom the Pentax is 60mm or 60*1.5 = 90mm equivalent and at the longest end 250mm or 250*1.5= 375mm equivalent.
Whereas the rest starts at 70mm or 70*1.5= 105mm equivalent and at 200mm, 200*1.5=300mm equivalent.
And in practise those who are familiar with long tele-zoom will understand when I say that you will notice the difference when you are at 90mm (equivalent) and at 100mm (equivalent) as it affects your working distance and field of view.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-17-2012, 09:32 AM
|
| |
If a scratch leaves shadows on the lens as shown on OP's attached picture then logic dictates that light has been blocked over the scratched area. Am I wrong? Or am I right? By that can we assume that optical properties of the lens has been compromised?
OP might possibly need to retake the test with scene that has more details with a smaller aperture and possibily at different focal lengths to see the damage.
Carl Zeiss did have an article (short one) quite a while back IIRC in regards to getting absolute best performance out of your lens - one of the things they said was to not use a filter and the camera and lens have to be on a very stable platform (i.e. tripod and a remote trigger). But I suspect many here don't alway use a tripod, instead rely on the SR only.
Again, the use of a good filter, I emphasize again good filter and by that definition not cheap, though not perfect in its function (it will add a bit of degradation to the pic but you'll need to zoom a lot to even see it), is still the better option. Would you rather lose a $50 filter or a $500 lens? You still can take it off before you shoot.
So far I've tried and used quite a number of filters and so far find those from Tiffen, Hoya's basic ones like the hmc, Schneider Krezeunach's , Nikon's and Marumi unacceptable. So far they've shown to either have flare or ghosting effect and some soften the images. B+W filters are the ones I'm using now and I find that they're excellent in field use. I have not tried Hoya's top of the line HD ones yet but I will someday. Besides, if someone can confirm me on this, isn't the use of a filter needed to complete a WR lens seal?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-15-2012, 08:12 AM
|
| |
bokeh
and
Bokeh in Pictures
If you take a look at Frank's picture and cover the highlights - can you spot the difference ? That would be my question. I think if there is someone willing to create a blind test of pictures of bokeh (not with highlights) it should be interesting to collate the results and see if a high proportion of people can spot the lens using a more rounder aperture blades. I propose that someone not to be me as I am lazy as hell will probably not do a proper job :hmm: .....
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-12-2012, 12:43 AM
|
| |
Then there would be an impact mark in the centre of the front element as well not just scratches to the side and furthermore don't you usually flip the hood to the storage position? So how would that have helped either? Let me put it to you this scenario:
Suppose I have a lens, with a lens hood on, I forget to cap the lens, and for whatever reason the keys I put in a different compartment came bouncing into the same compartment as the lens and happen to settle right within the hood. With the constant bumping and rubbing, the lens gets scratch, yes/no? In fact the hood facilitated the scratch on the lens.
Coz that was what happened to me on a dirt-road while riding a bike.
We're digressing here from OP's post, what actually happen we won't know, the lens has been scratched, looking at it you can try what the others posted but for mine, the scratches on the lens element appear as blur blobs on the photos. So why not just play safe and have both hood and filter on shall we? Its better than losing a lens to our own carelessness or accidents. Its not 100% guarantee but better than nothing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2012, 11:37 PM
|
| |
I don't think so. If it did, then the front element and the filter ring would have had more damage to it. Anyway it doesn't take that much force to knock a lens cap off. I'll give in to you that a lens filter won't give an absolute protection but my supposition still remains neither does a lens hood but I would advocate why not use both? You know......like double-bagging it
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2012, 11:14 PM
|
| |
I think what he meant was that most can't see the forest for the trees. There are other aspects of a lens that makes it good. I kinda agree with him not that I disagree with you, just that I agree with him more.
For example look at Steve McCurry's Afghan girl, we all know at that time he was using a Nikon rig so mostly likely a Nikkor lens (I'm guessing a 105mm at least?) and at that period mostly likely a Nikkor lens with usually a 7-bladed diaphragm (non-circular mind you). So did, not having a non-circular aperture blades/diaphragm prevented him from taking that stunning picture? I don't think so. Would having one had made it better? Perhaps, we'll never know.
If you can't make a good picture from using a normal lens then trust me, no matter how circular the diaphragm is, it won't make it better. But if there is a chance that it will make a good picture better, why not?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2012, 10:33 PM
|
| |
It would have to be a hard/sharp impact to break a good filter or the hoya hd filter. In this case the lens hood wouldn't save it as the lens cap came off and pieces of scratch the lens. So no a lens hood won't save or stop it. For all general purposes, a uv filter is a better option as it actually covers the front element.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2012, 09:17 PM
|
| |
woooboy.....
I don't think so . I know of a service that does lens recoat and stuff like that. But scratches like that? I think its better to get a new lens. Plus did it have a filter on it when that happens?
And by scratches that doesn't affect the iq much is fine hairline scratches not those.
I had my Carl Zeiss lens gouged almost the same way, the lens cap came off and I didn't realise it, and after that I had a very expensive paper weight. SO now I'm a strong advocate of using uv filters.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2012, 09:06 PM
|
| |
@paceyy
I have used the FA 77 for concerts and events before, wonderful lens but sometime I find it wanting especially in low light and reach. Perhaps a da* 50-135mm s more suited for you?
I know this may seem to clash with my statement above but they're for different type of photography, one is for street and portrait and the other I use for more sport and events.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2012, 08:59 PM
|
| |
Nice test but if you take dof+bokeh into consideration rather than the same exposure then for the da 70mm you will need to open up the aperture more to accommodate the same field of view.
Of course that said, I had both the da 70mm and the Fa 77, both are excellent lenses, just that I find the 77mm a bit too long for my taste and usage so I sold it after using for almost a year. No regrets so far.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2012, 01:57 AM
|
| |
Took the words right out from my mouth. +1
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-09-2012, 10:18 AM
|
| |
If they do come out with a lens to take advantage of the rear element in the mirror box, I hope it would be the first of many. Think of all the possibilities, all the pancakey lenses they can build. Even those with sdm in them......
Even if the new lens doesn't fit the other Pentax cameras. I'm fine with it. You can't have everything. (Yes you know to whom I'm referring to)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-05-2012, 07:16 AM
|
| |
They should just trash the damn thing, a potential not met is simply failure.
|
