|
Forum: Lens Clubs
06-16-2014, 05:56 AM
|
| |
The first one - plants that look like animals, cool!
Jarrod
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
06-11-2014, 07:18 AM
|
| |
I like the light and texture in that last one, nice.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
06-02-2014, 06:49 AM
|
| |
Interesting comparison - more than first meets the eye! I prefer the deeper colours of the first one. I would have thought most of that is the quicker exposure, which could then affect detail and apparent sharpness as well but I can't offer much of an opinion whether it would be enough to cause the sort of difference you pointed out. On the face of it, I suspect not but I would still need to pixel peep to try appreciate the difference in sharpness!
By coincidence I took my ST 55/1.8 for a walk on Sunday, first time in a while. It had rained earlier in the day and was overcast, soft light.. :). Both these taken at f7 or 8. I bumped the exposure of the first in LR by half a stop but other than some cropping, no other tweaks from raw in either.
Cheers
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
10-23-2012, 05:39 AM
|
| |
Window glass pretty much blocks UV.. My 50 was also very yellow, I bought a UV compact fluroescent "party light" and put that up pretty close - 2-3 inches above - the rear element. I also put aluminium foil around the rest of the lens (the bulb sends off quite a bit of heat) including the front element .. set aperture wide open.. cleared it up great in about 5 days.
Cheers, Jarrod.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
09-26-2012, 05:45 AM
|
| |
Thanks! I have a 50/1.4 as well, both only recently acquired but the 55 is certainly the easier to focus - quite a longer throw.
Jarrod
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
09-22-2012, 08:49 AM
|
| |
Well, finally got my M42 adaptor. First post with actual photos! Super-Tak 55/1.8 around the garden:
Jarrod
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
08-12-2012, 04:34 AM
|
| |
Thanks Dave and others for your responses. Yes, as Jakob suggested, between 1.4 and 2 the app ring has more travel and just the right degree of friction to hold the blades across maybe of the range between the two.
I don't have a particular requirement for 1.7 and didn't buy with that in mind: In addition to a relatively cheap means to get some great IQ, I feel simply that I've got a small, working piece of history here and I want to know that it does what it was designed and made to do. Notwithstanding minor details such as the fact it will be on my K-30..
Cheers
Jarrod
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
08-11-2012, 12:04 AM
|
| |
Hi there,
I've recently taken delivery of a Super Tak 1.4/50. Sadly I can't post any pics just yet (waiting to get the adaptor I've bought, this is my first m42) however I quickly noticed that the lowest two aperture stops are 1.4 and then 2. I assumed there would be an interim stop in there i.e. 1.7. I've seen discussions where people refer to using 1.7 with a "super takumar" so I'm wondering if this is normal for the particular variant I've got or if this particular piece is not up to spec for some reason.
My lens is a Super Takumar so-called "Mark IIA", product number 37800, I understand the first of the 7 element models with no white dot at f2. There is an interim stop between all the other f#s, except 11-16, which I read somewhere is normal, but I can't find anything explaining what I've got.
If anyone can shed any light on this I'd appreciate it. In any case, I look forward to getting it into action and sharing some pics.
Cheers
|
