Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 
Log in or register to remove ads.

Showing all 5 reviews by RKKS08

Review of: SMC Pentax-FA 100-300mm F4.5-5.6 by RKKS08 on Wed June 2, 2021 | Rating: 7 View more reviews 
SMC-Pentax_FA_100-300mm_F4_5-5_6.jpg

Views: 82171
Reviews: 13
Some time ago I got a SMC Pentax-FA 4.5-5.6/100-300mm from eBay in seemingly very good condition (looks nearly like unused). Because of Corona restrictions and unrelated illness I could not leave my rooms for a long time, so I nearly forgot about that lens. Today I "found" it again, and as it is a perfect sunny and warm day, I just did some test shots from my balkony to the surrounding nature. My hands are not steady anymore, so I had to use F5.6 to get shake reduction to work well enough. Why do I post this? People who shared experience about the 100-300 kept stating that there is some strong reduction in resolution at 250-300mm and fully open aperture. Well, this may be true, but I was positively surprised by the quality of the pictures - much better than I had expected after reading all these postíngs. My question now is: has anyone compared this lens to the DA 55-300 (which also has a reputation not to be the sharpest near 300mm)? Of course the FA is big and heavy and not everyone will like to carry it around all day - but it is also a lot cheaper. And it is a full frame lens.

Review of: Rear Converter-A 2x-S by RKKS08 on Wed March 5, 2014 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
Rear-Converter-A-2X-S.jpg

Views: 51281
Reviews: 12
I just got a used one in very good condition for GBP 36 from eBay. It should replace my Kenko 2X KAX Teleplus MC7, which once replaced my Vivitar 2X-22. The Kenko has already been a very big improvement in resolution and contrast (and offered the "A" contacts). According to reviews in this forum and other places, the A 2X-S will be even better (and it is shorter by 1.5mm). With 7 elements, just the SMC coating may help. After some usage, I may write a real review. Just for now, I think I should mention that the manual lists the following lenses as incompatible: Reason: coupling not possible - K 3.5/15 - A 3.5/15 - M 3.5/24-35 Reason: strong vignetting - Many tele lenses longer than 300mm. As the manual seems to be from the eighties, there may be more incompatibilities with newer lenses.

Review of: SMC Pentax-M 50mm F2 by RKKS08 on Sun June 2, 2013 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
smc_pentax-M_50mm_F2_0_070106_66k_es80s2s0x800.jpg

Views: 365228
Reviews: 100
I bought this lens new in December 1981 for DM 99, to replace the 2/50 Porst lens which came with a K-mount Porst SLR I had bought 2 months before. It was a big improvement in sharpness and colour rendering, and many of my best shots have been made with this lens. I never found a weakness in real life shots. Maybe at F2 it's a bit softer than at F4, but the difference seems to be smaller than with every other lens I owned. It should also be mentioned that, at the same size as the SMC-M 1.7/50, it sits deeper in the housing (less glass), providing more shading for the front lens if you don't use a hood. For several years, it also was my standard lens for party shooting with flash (mostly at F5.6-F8), and enlarging to poster size still showed no weakness. Very sturdy, too (fully metal). After I got the A 1.4/50 together with a nearly unused Super A, it stayed fixed on my ME Super in the back of my cars for many years, never any problems.

Review of: SMC Pentax-A 70-210mm F4 by RKKS08 on Fri May 24, 2013 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
smc_Pentax-A_70-210mm_F4.jpg

Views: 305546
Reviews: 65
It is big and heavy, but in this respect not different from many of well regarded 4/200 primes of that time, as the Takumars and the Pentacons. I checked for resolution @200 compared with the Pentacon 4/200, and intense pixel peeping was needed to see a difference. At the long end there is strong green/purple fringing even at F5.6, but I saw this with all prime tele lenses I owned in the past. With film, most people would never see it because they wouldn't crop strong enough, but in the digital age all this can be seen on a monitor with a tip of the finger. What I found, however, is that with my K200D it is under exposing by one stop at the short end, increasing to nearly 2 stops at the long end. So I don't trust Pentax when they call it a constant F4 maximum aperture. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=173551 https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=173550

Review of: Takumar 135mm F2.8 Bayonet by RKKS08 on Mon April 25, 2011 | Rating: 0 View more reviews 
Pentax_Takumar_Bayonet_135mm_F28.jpg

Views: 62977
Reviews: 8
I just won this lens at an eBay auction (€ 27.95 including shipment), and it may take some time till I finally get it. But I want to add some comments beforehand. 1) Some time ago I met a retired professional who told me that in the eighties an official Pentax dealer showed him a written internal paper by Pentax which informed that, since 1979/1980, ALL Pentax/Takumar lenses not labelled as "SMC" are nonetheless MULTICOATED. They would just lack the patented SMC coating, but the multicoating should not be worse than that of the competitors. If this is true, it would include most of the Takumar Bayonet lenses. 2) Also some time ago, I downloaded a PDF with a detailed real life comparison (including some marginal chart tests) of the Pentax 135mm range lenses. I think I got it from a link in some other forum, if I can find out the URL, I will add it to this comment. His results differ in some respects from the usual findings in forum posts. Winner in this test is the SMC-F 2.8/135 [IF], closely followed by the SMC-A 2.8/135, which is not too surprising, as they are the newest. But for the rest, there are some amazing results (which could be caused by the fact that all these lenses are old, used, and probably would need a factory adjustment). In this test the Takumar 2.8/135 [Bayonet] is, together with the SMC-M 2.8/135, very near to the winners! It also was on par with the SMC-M 3.5, and in most respects better than the generally highly praised SMC-K 2.5/135. Also astonishing: the missing SMC coating did not show ANY bad effects in real life shots with the Tak 2.8, but was VERY visible with the Tak 2.5! Could it be Pentax changed the coating during production without mentioning it? Also, the Tak 2.5, wide open, has significant loss of resolution against the Tak 2.8, and PF and other colour errors are SIGNIFICANT worse at all apertures. So, according to these results, one could think the Tak 2.8 could be a better buy than the Tak 2.5. By the way, he also compared to the Pentax DA 4-5.6/55-300mm at 135mm, which was no match to any of the Primes in any respect. Added: Just found the URL. http://www.tzcobretti.de/testberichte.html (Non working link removed) Unfortunately everything is german only, but the result sheet (conclusion at the end) should be fairly self-explaining.



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:23 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