| Showing all 23 reviews by jbondo | |
| Review of: SMC Pentax-A* 300mm F2.8 ED [IF] by jbondo on Thu July 4, 2019 | Rating: 10 | View more reviews | |
Views: 63600
Reviews: 8
|
I've had the pleasure of using a very wide selection of Pentax lenses made from the 70's to present (2019). Optically, this model ranks among the very best.
Pros:
- Outstanding contrast and color rendition.
- Astrophotos are one the harshest tests of a lens: Sharp, almost color-error free astrophotos at f2.8, excellent sharp from f3.5, Equal to many purpose made astronomical instruments by f4.5. In all other shooting situations other than astro, the only reason not to use f2.8 is when you need more depth of focus. The center performance is equal to the HD Pentax-D FA* 50mm F1.4 SDM AW. The FF edge performance is in the same league by the aforementioned at F5.6. Those of you with a DFA 50 1.4 will know this is no small feat.
- Beautiful bokeh
- Works wonderfully with the 1.7x AFA - Although the 1.7x AFA is a very good performer overall, it can't come close to keeping up the the A300/2.8, and you'll sacrifice quite a bit of contrast and resolution. Even so, it's still a very usable combo. - If you don't need the AFA, you're better off shooting with the 1.4-L or 2.0-L TC's ... if you need optical magnification at all.
- Focus ring action is light and perfect for flicking to focus with a thumb or single finger while you grasp the lens with your other digits. It's a pleasure to manual focus.
- Focus Preset ring is quite useful.
Cons:
- A significant negative to this otherwise stellar model is the extreme nose-heavy balance on the mount point - so don't even try on a tripod unless you have a suitable arca plate or similar. Even worse, an extra-long plate will not clear the housing for the front element group without a spacer, so you'll either have to seek out one of just the right size or custom make your own if you want one that doesn't protrude excessively but still balances properly. You need one exactly 3.5" from the thread centerpoint, and 4" total. This will still only barely balance if you have a 112mm filter attached and the hood out. In a nutshell, the mounting is terrible.
- Extremely hard to find the factory rear drop-in CPL. - However, there is enough room for a CPL to fit the standard filter folder - you just won't be able to adjust it while installed.
- The heavy foot is not detachable to save weight if you only want to do hand-held.
Commentary / Observations:
Despite the A300/2.8 's optical superlatives, the SMC Pentax-M* 67 400mm F4 ED [IF] does everything right physically that this model didn't. That is, it has an excellent well-balanced detachable foot, the foot to lens mounting uses 1/4-20 threads so you can even use a monopod without the foot installed. It has convenient strap mounting points, and finally - the extendable hood is threaded so that it soundly locks in place and you can securely set the lens down on end without damaging or collapsing the hood. The A300/2.8's single hood screw is no match for the weight of a lens on end. If only the designers had incorporated the great mechanical design of the 67 400/4 into the A300/2.8...
Overall / Summary:
This model has handling shortcomings. Despite this I still rate 10 overall because of the world-class optical performance.
| |
| Review of: HD Pentax-D FA* 50mm F1.4 SDM AW by jbondo on Tue August 7, 2018 | Rating: 10 | View more reviews | |
Views: 102569
Reviews: 36
|
Overall Outstanding.
Has slightly more spherochromatism (green/magenta on defocus) than I was expecting, but it's very minimal and not a major concern but I guess I was expecting it to be perfect.
When doing live view preview in Av mode, it's so nice how much quieter the electronic aperture is. It's not totally silent, but it's pleasingly quiet compared to mechanical aperture models.
On My K-1 Autofocus performs much better with Pdaf rather an live view Cdaf.
| |
| Review of: HD Pentax-D FA 28-105mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR by jbondo on Mon August 6, 2018 | Rating: 0 | View more reviews | |
Views: 166880
Reviews: 41
|
This is a home-run of a consumer zoom.
It delivers everything but high speed and bokeh in a moderately priced, moderately sized package. It's the perfect K-1 walk-around lens.
I stopped using my 18-135 on my K-01 and started using this instead. The increase in image quality was well worth the reduction in zoom range.
It absolutely trounces on film-era zooms. I resoundingly recommend it!
| |
| Review of: SMC Pentax-A 35-80mm F4-5.6 by jbondo on Mon August 6, 2018 | Rating: 0 | View more reviews | |
Views: 58131
Reviews: 8
|
On the K-1: I have to say, the center sharpness at 35mm surprised me. Quite sharp wide open. The corners are a different matter, soft by the time you reach the corners of apsc, and terribly smeared out by the corner of full frame. These were fine in the film era, but not so great by today's standards.
It's really pretty good for a compact old manual zoom. I rate this as fairly good value (they are super cheap) for apsc.
I'd stay away from them on full frame. It just can't keep up with modern designs.
| |
| Review of: Pentax Mount Adapter K (M42 Screwmount to K Mount) by jbondo on Sat December 3, 2016 | Rating: 10 | View more reviews | |
Views: 62321
Reviews: 18
|
The real deal. Superior to cheap knock-offs. This is the one you want.
| |
| Review of: Rear Converter-A 1.4x-S by jbondo on Sat December 3, 2016 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 39101
Reviews: 7
|
Unlike its 2x brother, which is a diva that only plays well with certain lenses, this rear converter plays well with most, including many modern lenses.
Sharp and contrasty, small in size. This along with the 1.4x L version are the very best of all the classic Pentax Rear converters, only surpassed by the modern HD DA 1.4 Rear Converter.
I rate this an 8. It's very good, but not outstanding. It is sharper than the 1.7x AFA.
| |
| Review of: Rear Converter-A 2x-S by jbondo on Tue November 29, 2016 | Rating: 7 | View more reviews | |
Views: 51463
Reviews: 12
|
My experience matches the fine review written by Stone G. Please see his review for most of the details you will need to know.
I'll try to add some additional unique points.
- It appears the formula really is specific to some lenses. It does a great job with some, but matches poorly with others. Atrocious on the da 60-250.
- This is the only TC I've ever tried that copes well with very fast lenses. It, along with the Rear Converter-A 1.4x-S are excellent matches at low F and Full frame for the SMC Pentax-A* 135mm F1.8
- It also matches very well with the SMC Pentax-A 50mm F2.8 Macro.
I do lament that it doesn't transmit data from lens to camera. It's such a pleasure to use the SMC Pentax-F 1.7x AF Adapter because not only does it pass the data, but it also automatically converts the values to be correct with the TC applied. I miss that every time I use this. HOWEVER, this one has better image quality, so sometimes that wins the day and I use this instead.
- When compared to the Rear Converter-A 1.4x-S , the 2x has less contrast and is slightly less sharp. That's relative, though. This TC (for lenses which is matches well with) is a strong performer. The difference between this and a generic TC is like night and day.
| |
| Review of: SMC Pentax-A 50mm F2.8 Macro by jbondo on Tue November 29, 2016 | Rating: 10 | View more reviews | |
Views: 184549
Reviews: 37
|
I have used numerous lenses. I do not give high scores easily. (I think a huge number of PF review scores are ridiculously inflated.) That being said, this lens is outstanding.
Remarkable:
- Extreme resolving power: Out-resolves all other 50mm and 100mm macros I've tried. Much sharper than the limited's I've tried. The sharpness is not limited to the macro domain. It's just as sharp at 10 meters. Well matched with the Rear Converter-A 2Xs. In fact, it's sharper even with the aforementioned converter than the S-M-C tak or the m 100/4's without.
Handling
- Smooth, well damped focusing.
- Inset outer element means it effectively has a built in hood.
- Modest size. (But this comes at the cost of 1:1)
Image quality
- Very good contrast /acutance above f3.5
- Bokeh good for this class of lens on mid-distance subjects. Produces attractive portraits on full frame but you may have to soften in post if the sharpness is unflattering for your subject.
- Great color rendering.
- Focus 'snaps' well so it's a pleasure to manual focus through the OVF.
Flexibility:
This lens has good enough bokeh and has reasonable enough speed to serve as an all-around 50 in most situations. It can produce some remarkable photos in full direct sunlight.
Weakness:
- Doesn't do 1:1 without an extension tube
- Manual focus only. (an issue for some, but not all users.)
| |
| Review of: SMC Pentax-FA J 18-35mm F4-5.6 by jbondo on Tue October 11, 2016 | Rating: 7 | View more reviews | |
Views: 110592
Reviews: 28
|
This review is written with Full-frame in mind. There are far better kit lenses for aps-c and I would not recommend this for aps-c.
This is not a high-performing lens, but that's OK, you wouldn't expect a lens this inexpensive, lightweight, and small(ish) to be. It's unique, that's for sure. An ultra-wide zoom at a dirt cheap price.
Fairly Good color rendering... Reds are bold and blues are slighly odd, but not too bad. reasonable center sharpness. Bad corner sharpness and corner CA. Moderate Contrast/Accutance.
Did I mention how light it is? It's what won me over: it's a great ultrawide walkaround. It's soooo convenient to throw in the bag compared to the heavier high-performers. It's a great vacation utility companion to the D FA 28-105. and you won't shed too many tears if something unfortunate happens to it on vacation... well, until you go to find another one, they're scarce!
| |
| Review of: SMC Pentax-M 85mm F2 by jbondo on Tue March 24, 2015 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 254257
Reviews: 47
|
Sharpness: Sharp enough wide open; Very sharp from f4-11. In some respects the wide open sharpness is ideal for portraiture because it's not so sharp (like the 85/1.8 can be at F2.8) that it's still forgiving to your subject if they have blemishes.
Abberations: Moderate Purple CA when wide open that is so broad that it's almost more like halation. Only a problem in certain conditions, and it's pretty much under control at 2.8. Not a big issue to me.
Bokeh:
Better than most lenses. Blur quality is quite smooth, and the optical formula favors blurring the background before the foreground when each is equidistant from the subject plane. This is ideal for subject isolation in typical shooting conditions. Could use more aperture blades, but the smoothness of the blur means that the hexagons are not as obtrusive as in many other lenses with 6 blades.
Handling: Excellent. Waaaaay smaller than the preceding 85mm 1.8's. The convenience factor is very high for this lens due to its size. Time and again, this has found itself in the bag due to size.
Color Rendering. Very good. Typical M series - slightly towards blue but not obtrusively so.
Value: Not cheap, but you get pleasing performance for the price.
On Full Frame: Special mention here - this lens is fine on APS-C like a K-01, but it's notably better on digital Full Frame where it really performs well and can turn the bokeh to beautiful creamy mush. Unlike some other reviewers, my copy is acceptably sharp in the corners on FF. Not super, but just fine for intended use.
Overall: The sweet spot for me is f2.8 with close subject. The strengths of this lens are it's size and portrait performance. I like it quite well. Lens hood recommended.
| |
| Review of: Takumar 200mm F3.5 by jbondo on Sat March 21, 2015 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 156956
Reviews: 30
|
Character, character, character! Just as many other reviewers have noted, the Glorious Bokeh is just right. Long and a bit heavy, with outstanding build quality, it can be a bit taxing to carry about. It has good transmittance despite the earlier type glass coatings due to the low number of elements. The foot is highly recommended, as it can be hard to balance on a tripod without.
Much recommended, and an excellent value despite its limitations.
| |
| Review of: Rear Converter K T6-2X by jbondo on Tue November 4, 2014 | Rating: 6 | View more reviews | |
Views: 40446
Reviews: 5
|
Like a couple of other reviewers I have used this with the 300/4 K. I got pretty good results on very sturdy tripod at F11 (effective f22)
http://jbmedia.zenfolio.com/smcp300_4
After long term use and a chance to try on different lenses, I am downgrading my rating. It's still pretty good, but by no means great.
| |
| Review of: SMC Pentax 300mm F4 by jbondo on Sun July 20, 2014 | Rating: 7 | View more reviews | |
Views: 172931
Reviews: 35
|
Great performance on a budget. Sharp, but does have significant magenta in high contrast OOF areas when shooting under f8.
Correction. I previously stated that this had the same optical formula as the M42 S-M-C-Takumar-300mm-F4. It does not.
| |
| Review of: SMC Pentax 67 / S-M-C Takumar 6x7 / Super Takumar 105mm F2.4 by jbondo on Tue June 24, 2014 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 174355
Reviews: 26
|
This is one of my go-to portrait lenses for full-frame 135. I couple it using the Pentax "P Adapter" . I have never used it with 6x7 body, so my review is for 35 only. This is for the S-M-C version.
I adore this lens for portrait shots where I don't want any vignette, or would otherwise have to correct for vignette. Specifically, I substitute using this instead of the legendary SMCT 1.8/85 when I want even field illumination.
Background blur quality is outstanding, foreground blur is very good, and color rendition is good. Has plenty of resolution for a Canon 6d. This is one of the lenses that can produce a strong 3-D effect under the right lighting conditions. Yes, it's a large lens on 35, but totally worth the size and weight!
Even with the added cost of adapting this to 35, I still consider this model an excellent value.
| |
| Review of: Fish-Eye-Takumar 18mm F11 by jbondo on Mon June 23, 2014 | Rating: 3 | View more reviews | |
Views: 47996
Reviews: 8
|
The very first thing you need to know about this lens is that there are a huge number out there that are internally degraded. Separation and edge-black flaking are more the norm than the exception. If you want to actually use one of these, prepare to hunt for one without the usual problems.
(July 2014 - review rewritten based on digital Full-Frame testing.)
This lens is good for: 1. Collections as a historic item. It makes for a great showpiece in the display cabinet. 2. If you get one cheap and want a really tiny lens that takes up practically no space in your bag - and you are shooting stationary subjects from a tripod at moderate distances at F22 or 32. Don't even think about using this lens at F11. Any passable shot requires a trip to slowsville.
APS-C: Fair at F22 or 32. Color rendition and sharpness are best in the center. Doesn't handle high dynamic range well. Direct sun produces veiling.
Full-Frame: IQ deteriorates rapidly towards the edges and aberrations can smear over 1 degree. Image circle doesn't quite cover the extreme corners.
As an alternate, a good copy of a S-M-C or SMC 17/4 it's almost as small, and has superior overall performance.
| |
| Review of: Bellows-Takumar/Super-Multi-Coated Bellows Takumar 100mm F4 by jbondo on Wed March 5, 2014 | Rating: 6 | View more reviews | |
Views: 39607
Reviews: 7
|
The biggest positive of this lens (in combination with a bellows) is the ability to focus from infinity to beyond 1:1 without changing your setup. Want to walk around a nature preserve and take a super close up of a flower followed by a shot of a far-off bird without switching any gear? This is a good combo for you. The second best attribute is that it's quite sharp.
Tip: Put the Asahi Pentax Variable Close-Up Ring and Extension Tube #2 on back of this and you've instantly got a lens that can infinity focus without all the bulk of a bellows.
Another reviewer mentioned that the aperture blades on this give nice stars (the star spikes peak around f7-10). If you want stars, great! Since this primary purpose of this lens is macro, and I usually don't want stars in my macros, this is a negative for me. If I want to induce stars, I prefer to stick an aperture mask on the front of a lens so I can precisely control the effect. It's all a matter of taste though, and some people will love it. Even though they have the same optical formula, I can definitely say you will get more bokeh 'flavor' with the Takumar-Bellows when compared with the S-M-C 4/100.
If you want a smaller, more convenient setup you might consider the S-M-C 100mm f/4 macro instead. I find it more practical, and if you need more than 1:2, you can always pop extension tubes on the back.
| |
| Review of: S-M-C/Super Takumar 300mm F4 by jbondo on Sat December 14, 2013 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 163127
Reviews: 18
|
(Updated Oct 2014)
This is for the last S-M-C version.
Example Gallery that shows good and bad attributes, including some good examples of what looks like lack of sharpness that is really a case of DOF being too shallow for the given subject.
http://jbmedia.zenfolio.com/s-m-c_takumar_4_300
First the bad: Expect to see magenta and green in high contrast situations below F8.
Good: In the digital realm, with post processing this is a very sharp and fast lens given the price. It has only fair balance using on a tripod with the built in foot (but much better if you mount using a longer plate under the foot) and the foot can be conveniently rotated about the lens to quickly allow portrait/landscape orientation. The built in lens hood is very nice. It has the typical luxurious mechanical refinement and although focus is tedious due to the 270'ish degree rotation, it also makes it quite easy to achieve critical focus. The mechanical feel is absolutely fantastic and very satisfying. It's also slightly lighter and shorter than the K 300/4.
Overall: if you're on a budget and your subject is not moving quickly to follow focus...and you're willing to Post-Process the aberrations, this is a fine choice. If you have a bigger budget, there are better lenses.
Side note: Because this lens has a rectangular light baffle at the rear, if you're using an M42 adapter and it's not precisely machined, the baffle will be out of alignment with the film/sensor orientation. If you see any odd vignetting, check for this first.
| |
| Review of: Super-Takumar Zoom 70-150mm F4.5 by jbondo on Thu December 12, 2013 | Rating: 5 | View more reviews | |
Views: 31484
Reviews: 3
|
I wasn't expecting much from an old zoom lens. I was totally surprised with the sharpness and low CA. It is as sharp as modern inexpensive zooms and has less CA than some moderately priced lenses. However...on the down side, this thing is very slow, and although it has "one-touch" zoom and focus, it's very long and bulky. Stick two 4/150 Taks (without hoods) end-to-end and you'll about equal the length of this thing.
My first instinct is to not recommend this thing to anyone because it's so slow and bulky...but it actually takes great photos, better than any other vintage zoom I've used.
If you pick one up cheap and you want to shoot outdoors and you don't mind the bulk, go for it! Otherwise you might want to leave it for the collectors.
| |
| Review of: S-M-C/Super Takumar 24mm F3.5 by jbondo on Thu December 12, 2013 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 161915
Reviews: 15
|
This is for the S-M-C version.
Optical: This lens is acceptably sharp at the edges, and *fantastically* sharp in the center from wide open. It's as center sharp as my best examples of 1.4/50, 1.8/85, and 4/100. Also note that other reviewers mentioned the sharpness, so it's not just that I've an exceptional specimen. Speed leaves a little to be desired, although the short focal length is quite forgiving with borderline handheld shutter speeds. Closest focus distance is very close and allows for tremendous DOF at high f-stops. Moderate geometric distortion, but I rarely need to correct for it, and sometimes like it and leave in on purpose.
Mechanical: It's an absolute joy to use, as it has the super feel these are known for. Butter smooth precision makes critical focus a real pleasure. The lens hood has a great and convenient mounting system and gives very good coverage on full frame. If you're shooting on crop sensor, the hood for the 1.8/85 gives the correct coverage and will work better.
Overall, As long as the light isn't too low and you're not too concerned with periphery sharpness, this lens is a great choice for general shooting.
| |
| Review of: S-M-C Takumar 6x7 / Super Takumar 6x7 200mm F4 by jbondo on Sat November 30, 2013 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 46415
Reviews: 8
|
If you are looking for a relatively inexpensive lens for astro work, you've found it. I've never used it on a MF camera, so my review is only for using it on smaller format cameras. I read that this was a good lens for astrophotography, so I picked one up to use on a Full-Frame and APS-C 35mm cameras. I was not disappointed.
On a APS-C sensor, the stars are pinpoint from corner to corner at F4. As another reviewer already mentioned, color tonality is exceptional in this role. (One of the most difficult aspects of getting good astro shots is keeping all the stars from clipping the color channels (which degrades the saturation) and this lens does a better job than anything short of a pricey telescope or much more expensive lenses.) Field illumination is also very even - hardly any vignette at all. Of course, I 'm using the lens in its "sweet spot", but this is really important when you're doing deep-sky shots and a little vignette is often the difference between getting enough picture data to make a good stitch with or not. Mechanically it's easy to make critical focus with. If you're mating this with a dedicated CCD or DSLR, there's enough room to fit a filter wheel between the lens and camera. If you using something like the Pentax P-Adapter (6x7 to M42) to fit it to your dslr, you can take advantage of the fact that the adapter has internal 49mm threads, and therefore you can use a 49->48mm stepdown ring to enable use of your astronomical filters.
A solid value, as these are readily available online for good prices.
| |
| Review of: S-M-C/Super Takumar 28mm F3.5 by jbondo on Wed November 27, 2013 | Rating: 6 | View more reviews | |
Views: 424594
Reviews: 58
|
This is for the Late first model (58mm threads, and f16 smallest aperture) - still fairly early, though, as it it came in an AOCO case:
Optical: Lens hood is necessity with this earlier model, there is major contrast loss when the sun shines anywhere on the outer element. If you use a crop sensor camera, use a hood made for a longer focal length. Sharpness is only fair. My example is in excellent mechanical and cosmetic shape, so I have no reason the think the lack of sharpness is due to age or rough treatment. It's just not that sharp. This lens has a major fault that interferes with my workflow -- that is, it exhibits color shift according to the aperture selected. Colors are significantly warmer at f3.5 than they are at f11. Note that this does not exhibit in the same way as you might see with some fast Super Takumars where you'll get diffuse warm "glow" all the sudden when wide open. The color shift is progressive instead, and seems independent of sharpness. Anyhow, if you're using gray cards/expodisc/custom white balance, be aware that you'll need to calibrate at the same f stop that you intend to shoot at. The color shift isn't real bad, but it will probably drive anyone with OCD crazy.
Mechanical: An absolute dream to use. Mechanically, this lens is a solid 10. Better than most of the 30+ other Takumars I've used. In fact, one of the best I have ever used, any brand, any model.
My favorite use of this lens is intentionally making major flare to recreate the "washed out" dreamy classic look.
| |
| Review of: Super-Multi-Coated Takumar/Auto-Takumar 85mm F1.8 by jbondo on Mon November 4, 2013 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 217246
Reviews: 24
|
My copy has fungus and suffers from reduced global contrast, particularly at f1.8, so my review reflects that. (I'll update this review once it's CLA'd.) Despite the fungus, it's still a very strong performer and it holds up quite well to the merciless acid test of astrophotography. It has a little more CA than I'd like to see, but it's not excessive.
I own numerous M42 taks (most of the line) and so can accurately compare with the others. Many people have commented on the excellent sharpness of the lens, and I agree it's quite sharp. To me, though, the most outstanding feature is the really excellent color rendition. Colors look natural and balanced, especially compared to many other lenses, including those from the modern era. I'm intrigued by what makes the color look so much better, so I plan to set up a spectrograph to measure it against some others. I'll put that in the separate posting, of course.
The combo of outstanding color rendition, combined with high sharpness and good bokeh (and of course the legendary takumar mechanical feel) makes this a very enjoyable lens to use.
| |
| Review of: S-M-C/Super Fish-Eye-Takumar 17mm F4 by jbondo on Thu October 24, 2013 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 104161
Reviews: 12
|
Subject of review. S-M-C version.
Review:
I originally bought this for collection/investment, and didn't really intend to shoot much with it. Much to my surprise, I found it to be quite useful for shooting wide angle, including demonstration videos, on crop sensor cameras. Most of the severe distortion is already cropped out of the frame on APS-C, and it's not hard to flatten the images in PP. It's quite handy if you're sitting at a table with a crowd. This lens has become part of my standard kit when I carry 4+ lenses in the bag. I really do use it that much. It's a bit slow for low light. Performs best from f5.6 - f8. Aperture priority metering is way off and varies by stop on canon(60d, 5dMkII, 6d) so you'll want to verify exposure if you use canon bodies. Flare isn't really an issue, but you will experience significant contrast loss and some color shift when the sun is shining directly on the front element. Which leads us to a tip...
If you use a crop sensor body, there IS a lens hood that works like a champ, and it doesn't vignette- the round (not rectangular) clamp-on hood for the Super Takumar 28mm f3.5 Version I (the larger early version). Without any modification, It will clamp to the front-most ring that controls the filter selection. It stays on very firmly, and you can then twist the hood to change filters, which is either good or bad, depending on your needs. In any case, it's a super add-on that offers physical protection and flare reduction for any crop sensor user. I can't recommend this enough.
Overall: I didn't expect to like this lens very much. I was wrong, I have come to really enjoy it and often use.
Update Dec 11, 2013: I acquired a second one of these and the optical performance very similar. Mechanically, the filter ring on the second one is firmer and it locks into the detents more positively. (Judging be the other reviews, it appears that a loose filter wheel ring is a issue that affects some, but not all of these.) An interesting thing is that my second one has a better multi-coating on the elements. (It's not a huge difference, but there is definitely a difference. Looks like a 1/2 stop less reflected light, and the color of the reflection has less green and blue. The second one also has the higher serial number. It appears that it may be a plus to seek out the later specimens.
Update June 2014: Prone to nighttime 6-pointed 'sun-stars'. I've had customers comment that they really like them in the available light night shots. I'm not so fond of them, but according to customers they are attractive.
| |
