|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-20-2010, 05:16 PM
|
| |
I didn't realize the K-mount Takumar wasn't the same formula. Thanks for the information. I still find that it produces good results, though.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-20-2010, 10:58 AM
|
| |
I couldn't help but notice you have the K135 2.5. How do you like it? It's basically the same lens without a multi-coating.
What you say about the filter makes sense...I don't think a MC filter will greatly reduce glare even with a single-coated lens to work against. But hey, it's worth a try right?
I have gone out and taken some sample shots in bright sun on my K10D with the 135 2.5 Takumar lens, MC UV filter and cheapo rubber lens hood. I think the results speak for themselves.
Remember, this is about the lens, not the photographer. I know I suck....but the lens is another story. ;)
Takumar Bayonet Sample Shots - a set on Flickr
In particular I have two shots, one with hood and filter and one without...that demonstrate what it does to glare. namely, not much.
With Hood and Filter:
And bare-glass-naked ;) :
A difference, perhaps. But a small one at best.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-20-2010, 08:20 AM
|
| |
I don't actually have the necessary stepping rings to go from 52mm threads to a 52mm filter, but I can tell you this. The metal lens hood for a 135 f/3.5 Takumar would not encroach on the image circle on APS-C, and possibly not on 35mm, and it would provide more sun protection than either the built-in telescope hood or a rubber hood. All you'd need is the hood and a 52mm lens to 49mm filter adapter. Because it's a Tele lens you wouldn't ever notice the narrower gap at the end.
As I said earlier, but don't think i've quite made perfectly clear...a hood that goes as far past the end of the lens as possible, while remaining as narrow in diameter as possible, is definitely best.
If I happen by a camera shop that carries stepping rings I"ll get a 52 to 49 and test my theory properly, with sample shots.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-20-2010, 08:04 AM
|
| |
I have not officially reviewed it, but I think this lens is excellent. It's very fast, it has great bokeh especially wide open, beautiful color rendering and it's very sharp, all while being relatively small and lightweight for such a fast lens. The only downside is its tendancy to flare in bright light, which is fixable (as you surmised) with the right lens hood, something long but narrow, and possibly with a multicoated UV filter.
I paid $17 for mine on ebay, found out it was basically junk, then paid $60 to have it put right. If the one you see in that shop is 40 pounds, I'd say jump on it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-19-2010, 11:40 AM
|
| |
With the crop sensor increasing the focal length, you can actually use a narrower lens hood than what's reccomended, because even if it encroaches on the edges, you won't notice till the dark corners reach the cropped area.
I use mine with a screw-in 52mm rubber hood. it does okay at beating some flare but if I had my choice I'd get a long, narrow hood, or a screw in flower petal hood designed for a Tele lens. What I might consider is a step-down ring to 49mm, and a metal lens hood from a Takumar 135 f/3.5. In fact, i may try that as I have the appropriate gear to test it.
|
