|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-30-2015, 04:41 PM
|
| |
I know it isn't as simple as indicated. Most legacy lenses, for example, do not have aspherical elements - thus can't control certain aberrations as well. I get that, but in comparative terms, my thoughts are that the enhancement of any aberrations by the digital enlargement process is probably emphasising these optical flaws much more than the flaw itself. Thus, most legacy lenses will probably please users on FF much more than on APS-C ....... anyway, proof will be in the pudding.
Meanwhile, I'll continue to play with my legacy lenses on the K3 and have fun knowing that FF is but a few more night sleeps away .... sigh
(footnote - I note that the 'value' of FF legacy lenses (the good ones) are starting to climb again if sale data on ebay is anything to go by .... perhaps there are more Pentax users out there than we think - lol)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-30-2015, 04:07 PM
|
| |
I've been thinking about this topic recently (and it is doing my head in). Would it be fair to say that the legacy FF lenses will actually perform better, or to their "lines per mm" specification, on an actual FF sensor when compared to the APS-C sensor? DA lenses are optimised for the smaller sensor and in so doing might pack more "lines per mm" specification than their FF cousins (by design). That is, the FF legacy lenses were not designed for the camera digital enlargement that increases the APS-C image size to a FF equivalence (is this correct this statement?). If the latter statement is true, then this would explain, in part, the relatively increased incidence of PF in images taken with a legacy FF lens (i.e. the APS-C sensor and digital enlargement naturally enhances optical flaws).
So if my logic/ understanding is correct, then, it would be fair to say that the legacy FF lenses will actually perform better on a FF sensor than on a APS-C sensor (i.e. no digital enhancement to attain FF equivalence). This seems to match my observations of legacy lenses fitted to my fathers Sony A7r camera.
Anyway just thoughts.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-13-2015, 01:56 AM
|
| |
Steady on there tiger. I don't think my post was designed to soliciting such scorn.
Since your into criticising people perhaps I should firstly point out that you have acknowledged the golden ratio rule, and, I never said it superseded the rule of thirds. Further, I am simply interpreting the photo, I don't know what motivated the photographer to frame the image the way they did. Lastly, if an image makes sense then it is likely that there is a rule or two in play.
Otherwise, please yourself with all powerfulness - happy for you to be all powerful.
Regards
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-12-2015, 03:32 AM
|
| |
The thirds rule is not the only one.
In this I see leading lines with a hint of golden ratio. The track leads you from the edge of the photo to the centre, where, you will see the only decent patch of mud (dark brown colour), correlating with the golden ratio. Perhaps it is the diagonal rule. Anyway, I can see subtle rules at play.
Nice photo - I love the colours and the use of blur (it has good effect here).
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-12-2015, 01:38 AM
|
| |
The golden ratio might be a rule that would dictate a subject being centred in the photo.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-11-2015, 06:23 PM
|
| |
I emphatically agree. The following list of Takumars are superb on digital - SUPERB.
ST 24/3.5
SMC 35/2
Auto-Tak 35/2.3
ST 50/1.4 (all variants)
SMC 50/1.4
Auto-tak 55/1.8 (zebra - count the aperture blades)
ST 85/1.9
SMC 85/1.8
SMC 135/2.5 (version 2)
Tak 200/3.5
I haven't tried but expect the Tak 58/2 to be excellent
|
