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

Showing all 23 reviews by Jonathan Mac

Review of: Tamron Adaptall-2 (22A) 35-135mm F3.5-4.2 by Jonathan Mac on Thu April 27, 2023 | Rating: 4 View more reviews 
35-135_22A.jpg

Views: 40749
Reviews: 7
I had one of these briefly, thinking that it might provide a good wide range of focal lengths mainly for film use. It's well built and handles reasonably well but it's very, very soft unless stopped down to f/8. I'd rate it as unfit for purpose unless you want to shoot at f/8 or smaller.

Review of: Chinon Auto M42 55mm F1.7 by Jonathan Mac on Wed April 5, 2023 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
IGP7910.jpg

Views: 49477
Reviews: 6
I should say up front that I've only used this lens for low importance stuff and mostly for shallow depth of field shots, I've not put it through anything really demanding. Build quality is excellent, very comparable to Takumars though the lens is a little bigger than a Tak 55mm. The aperture clicks are lovely and the focus is beautifully smooth. The lens lacks a little sharpness and contrast wide open but it's perfectly useable and PP can make up for the slight lack in contrast. Stopped down to f/2.8 both of those aspects improve (as with any legacy fast fifty really) and I've found that the lens produces very good colours which often make the subject pop if it's something colourful. Certainly above average for a fast fifty of that era. Bokeh is pretty good, again, I'd say better than average. The situation where I've had trouble getting sharp results is stopped down at infinity - it always seems to be slightly mis-focused. Maybe I need to work on my MF technique but I haven't had that problem with other similar lenses. I haven't used it like this much either as I've only used it for shallow DoF so maybe I just need to give it more of a chance. Overall, the image quality is much better than you would expect for a very cheap, very old, medium-fast fifty millimetre lens. I'd say it's on a par with the 55/1.8 Takumars but it can be found cheaper so it's great value. I'll add that it has an A/M switch so adapting it to a K-mount or mirrorless camera is no problem. Some sample images, the first two of which were taken wide open on my K-3 and the others at f/2.8 on my S5. https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49731608726_8a6a6b3595_b.jpg Wide open test III by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50752036032_5530929fc0_b.jpg Obligatory christmas decoration bokeh #2 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52787863783_e97bd39f06_b.jpg First leaf by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52788342071_a654ca9fc5_b.jpg White flowers II by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Ricoh Rikenon xr 35mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Fri September 30, 2022 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
DSCN9969.JPG

Views: 27226
Reviews: 6
This review is for the first version of this lens, the one that is not a re-badged Pentax M 35mm f/2.8. The aperture goes to f/16, it has six blades, aa 52mm filter thread and minimum focus distance of 35cm. I stumbled across this lens online for €45 and decided to take a gamble on it, after all, I like 35mm primes as they make good standard lenses on APS-C cameras. When it arrived it was in mint condition, looked like it had never been used. Build quality is very solid - the same level as the M series - the focus is silky smooth and the aperture ring clicks nicely. I popped it on my K-3 and took it out for some shots and was blown away by the quality of images it could produce. This lens is sharp wide open - really sharp. Colours are bright and contrast is perfect. Bokeh is not super smooth but a bit swirly and with character. My all-time favourite manual 35mm is the M series f/2, due to the image quality and pleasure of use, but this Rikenon is a very close second judging by my experience with it so far. And it's much, much cheaper than the M 35/2. It's also significantly better than the M 35/2.8: sharper, better colour and contrast. And there's not much more to say about it - it's a really superb performer and a pleasure to use. The only negative is that the aperture click are in full stops, no halves. It's a shame this lens isn't more common so that more people could enjoy using it. I've now used it on digital full-frame (Panasonic Lumix S5) and I'm glad to report that it performs every bit as well there as it does on APS-C. A picture of the lens on an MX: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51683552671_4f502617c1_c.jpg MX with Ricoh XR Rikenon 35mm f/2.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Some sample images. https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51656823608_4316cf0925_c.jpg Wooden figures by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51873218986_d7655a4049_c.jpg Frosty leaf by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51873220221_dde717b40c_c.jpg The track by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52346295503_11d8329ee9_c.jpg School graffiti 2 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52348542018_4084d72ee1_c.jpg Building by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Tokina Aspherical AF 28-105mm F3.5-4.5 by Jonathan Mac on Fri April 1, 2022 | Rating: 6 View more reviews 
Tokina_28-105mm_800px_1.jpeg

Views: 5015
Reviews: 3
I got this lens for a good price with the hope of using it as a general purpose zoom on film, combined with a fast fifty for lower light and shallow depth of field. This lens is very well built, with a heavy, solid feel to it, though it's not that big. The zooming action is nice and tight and it doesn't extend too much at the telephoto end. Manual focus is difficult due to the focusing ring having an extremely narrow range of movement, perhaps as little as 15 degrees from closest focus to infinity. Auto-focus is noisy and can fail to lock quite frequently, which is irritating. Image quality is OK but nothing exceptional and the corners, even on APS-C, are not sharp at all until stopped down significantly, f/8 or so. In the centre it's fairly sharp from wide open. Colours and bokeh are good and contrast is OK. The weight makes this lens a problem as a walkabout. Combined with an SFXn and AA-battery grip (instead of the standard lithium grip) the total package is 1.3kg, which is a lot for a film setup. The not-fantastic image quality mean that it's not very flexible as it needs to be stopped down. These two factors lead me to sell it as, though not a bad lens, it wasn't going to give me what I wanted from it. I did shoot a whole roll with it on that SFXn but I haven't developed or scanned it yet. A picture of the lens with the aforementioned SFXn: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50173434481_72e69634ef_c.jpg Pentax SFXn & Tokina 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF Aspherical by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr And a few sample images: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50109186551_a494b68d03_c.jpg Palm by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50109191081_96b7db8e27_c.jpg Flowers by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50109428787_227192aa51_c.jpg Rose by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Sigma Mini Wide II 28mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Tue July 6, 2021 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
miniwideII-1.jpg

Views: 220315
Reviews: 30
Back in the day there was fierce competition to provide wide (28mm) and telephoto (135mm) primes for people to add to the standard 50mm lens that came with the camera. This little Sigma must have been very close to the top of the pile because it's an excellent little lens that can be had for very little. It's light but still made of metal and compact. It handles well and is a pleasure to use on both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Image quality is very good, with nice colour rendering, good contrast, nice out-of-focus rendering and it's very sharp even wide open. Many reviews warn of flare but it's not something I've experienced a great deal and when I have I've been able to control it and use it to add to the image rather than detract from it. Perhaps if you used this as a general use wide angle on FF or film then the sun and other light sources would be more problematic. My copy has an A setting on the aperture ring but it's not compatible with Pentax's implementation of automatic aperture, it's compatible with Ricoh's system which means it has the dreaded Ricoh pin which can cause the lens to get stuck on an AF K-mount camera. I opened the lens up and removed the pin (rendering the A setting useless regardless of the camera used) for safety. It wasn't difficult. The close-focusing capability of this lens is extremely useful and makes it a good lens for capturing little details. All in all I'm very happy with the lens, especially for what it cost. It's far superior to the Pentax M series 28mm f/2.8 or /3.5 and compared to the A series 28/2.8, which it would have competed with back in the day, it's much sharper and has much nicer bokeh. In fact, the only classic 28mm lenses I've tried that I like more are the K and Vivitar (both Komine and Kiron) 28mm f/2s, which cost much more and are much harder to find. For most people looking to try an old 28mm lens this Sigma would be my recommendation. The first two sample photos show examples of the flare put to (I think) good use. https://live.staticflickr.com/7426/26966381054_8242931bd8_b.jpg DSCF1048a Sigma 28mm 2.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/7536/26966433094_ddfcc57da0_b.jpg DSCF1051a Sigma 28mm 2.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51288921263_bc3a4da949_b.jpg Fishy by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51289768070_e82c46dfb6_b.jpg Hand by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51288919468_b3598e0933_b.jpg Paint by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/7321/27503447451_23b16b5f3d_b.jpg DSCF1037a Sigma 28mm 2.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Sigma Autofocus 75-200mm F3.8 by Jonathan Mac on Wed March 3, 2021 | Rating: 2 View more reviews 
Vollbild.jpg

Views: 64707
Reviews: 17
I had high hopes for this lens, based on other reviews. When it arrived, despite being a push-pull, I found that it handled very well and felt good in the hand. But that was the end of the good impressions. At first it didn't work on my K-3 but did on an old SFXn. A clean of the electronic contacts improved things but on both cameras the electronic connection was lost all the time and the camera didn't know the aperture. I thought, well for what I paid I can put up with that if it provides good images. It doesn't. Apart from 70mm, the results are very soft wide open and don't improve much stopping down to f/5.6. At f/8 they're barely acceptable. At 70mm it doesn't perform too badly but you don't buy a (fairly) fast zoom to use it only at it's shortest focal length or stopped down to f/8. AF is quick and accurate but noisy. Build quality is good - it's all metal and feels weighty and reassuringly solid.

Review of: Vivitar Series 1 (Komine) 28-90mm F2.8-3.5 by Jonathan Mac on Tue July 14, 2020 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
Vivitar_Series_1_28-90mm_F2_8-3_5.jpg

Views: 121116
Reviews: 19
I got this lens very cheap to try out. Alas, it suffers from the very common sticky-aperture problem - the aperture blades close down too slowly to be in the right place when the shutter fires. Due to this I can only use it on my mirrorless cameras, where I focus and frame with the aperture already where it needs to be for the photo. It's no good on an SLR unless I fork out to have the aperture blades fixed, though I may do that at some point, depending on price of course, as it can produce some very nice images. This lens is sharp even at wide apertures and has a typical "vintage" lower contrast look to photos, which can be good if used correctly. It also suffers really badly from flare (veiling and blob) but it's the sort of good-looking flare that can be put to good use for the sake of creativity. All-in-all it can produce some very attractive images when you play to it's strength. It is very heavy and quite long so that makes it difficult to handle on the camera. The build quality is reassuringly tank-like, which I like. Overall I like the lens and would recommend it for having some fun on a mirrorless camera, as long as you can get it cheap, or even more expensively if the aperture works properly. If it turns out to be relatively cheap to fix the aperture then I'll surely try it out on my K-3 and on film. Here are a few sample images. https://live.staticflickr.com/2881/34176937961_3f564a8429_c.jpg DSCF2332a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/2839/33498076113_b5f2144ff5_c.jpg DSCF2346a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/2894/33923727210_cf4884a602_c.jpg DSCF2354a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/2891/34150374662_788c733265_c.jpg DSCF2348a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Sigma APO EX 70-200mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Sat June 8, 2019 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
1_IMGP7532_sigma_70_200.jpg

Views: 100581
Reviews: 25
After hankering after a 70-200mm f/2.8 for a long time, and having recently missed out on a good deal on the Tamron, I found this used copy of Sigma's original 70-200/2.8 for a decent price and, after some testing, decided to buy. Up to that point my longer lenses were all either manual primes or slow f/4-5.6-ish AF zooms and the difference between them and a fast 70-200mm is considerable. With this lens I can do things that I couldn't before - capture fast action or get nicely de-focused backgrounds. The price for that ability is the size and weight of a lens of this type, and the cost. That means it's use is limited as it's far too big and heavy for travelling, so it gets used only close to home. Overall I'm happy with the lens. The output is sharp, even when wide open, but it misses focus often enough to make using it wide open rather hit-and-miss, and I've had what I thought would be great shots spoiled by being slightly out of focus. For that reason I stop down to f/4 or slightly more and I find that I get more keepers that way. Of course, that negates the benefits of having an f/2.8 lens, but that aperture is there if I really need it and in that case I wouldn't hesitate to use it. The other downside of this lens is that the coatings give an unpleasant an unwelcome yellow/green tint to some images that I have found difficult to correct in PP. It doesn't always happen though, so it's not a huge negative. The lens has a detachable tripod collar (removal of which takes a chunk out of the weight of it) and on my copy the hood doesn't mount straight, and I assume this is due to some mis-use in it's previous life. I will keep the lens as it's too useful to let go, but I will keep an eye open for possible replacements. Some sample images. https://live.staticflickr.com/867/41677178761_804336545a_c.jpg IMG_6401a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/924/29745367008_9324f1b511_c.jpg IMG_7918a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/40880507273_1dfa97ea2a_c.jpg IMG_1567a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46930964625_52eb29d6b8_c.jpg IMG_1455a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46986975085_39688f9270_c.jpg IMG_1300a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Sigma EX DF 28-70mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Mon April 8, 2019 | Rating: 2 View more reviews 
Sigma_28-70mm_EX_DF.jpg

Views: 53874
Reviews: 8
I bought this lens used with the intention of using it mostly on AF film cameras but maybe occasionally on digital. I was very disappointed with the lens and took around two years to sell it (at a loss). The lens is big and very heavy and balances poorly on digital and film cameras. The weight would suggest good build quality but unfortunately that's not true. Despite not being used, just sitting on my lens shelf, it spontaneously developed a fault - the focusing was extremely stiff below ~3m, too stiff for any focus motor to move. Now for the optical quality - my copy was badly de-centred and produced soft images even on APS-C. Stopped down (not what you buy an f/2.8 lens for) image quality was still poor. I really don't have anything good to say about this lens other than that it looks cool, which is hardly a reason to buy it. It's very much a lemon of a lens. I have a much smaller, lighter and optically far superior Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8-4 which I use as a normal zoom for film (and occasionally on digital). Definitely one to avoid.

Review of: Sigma EX DC 30mm F1.4 by Jonathan Mac on Thu August 9, 2018 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
sigma30mm.jpg

Views: 95984
Reviews: 21
When I originally looked for a good normal prime it was between this lens and the DA 35mm f/2.8 limited, and the limited won. A few years later I came across a copy of the Sigma for €200 and couldn't resist so I bought it and gave it a whirl on the K200D. I later sold it just before I bought my K3 and maybe I should have kept it for a while to see how it fared on that camera, but I didn't so I can only say how it performed on the K200D. Nevertheless, it served to prove my initial decision had been correct. The limited is a keeper, even if it is two stops slower. Image quality is generally good but it's not sharp wide open and doesn't really get sharp until at least f/2.8, negating the advantage of the f/1.4 aperture, especially compared to the 35mm limited. Stopped down I had no complaints but saw no reason to keep it as the limited was better and sharper at f/2.8. AF was temperamental and could not be relied upon, though the K200D doesn't have the most advanced AF out there either, so some of that is surely down to the camera. The Sigma is bigger and heavier than the Pentax too, so with the problems mentioned above there was no reason left to keep it. I'd hesitatingly recommend this lens but with the caveat that only if you need that fast aperture and you're not bothered by it not being very sharp below f/2.8. Otherwise the DA 35mm limited, or the DAL 35mm f/2.4, are better options. These days I have a Fujifilm X-M1 and Fujinon 35mm f/1.4 lens as my low light/small size combo. The Fujinon is what this Sigma wishes it was - small, very sharp even wide open, amazing rendering and bokeh - practically perfect in every way. A size comparison with the 35mm f/2.4 (the 35mm limited is practically the same size): https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7375/10890334623_4d73fa21d7_c.jpg IMGP5898a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Some sample images: https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2908/14072694787_147cdd5070_c.jpg IMGP1663b by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7433/11268252616_f423e046b0_c.jpg IMGP6063a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5487/11268229706_28331fe3e2_c.jpg IMGP6082a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Sigma EX DC HSM 17-50mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Fri February 2, 2018 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
17-50nonOS.jpg

Views: 209216
Reviews: 47
I've owned the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens for quite a few years and it's my only other experience with a fast standard zoom on digital. I've always been pretty happy with the Tamron but longed for something better built and with quiet AF, so when I saw a copy of this Sigma for sale locally at a reasonable price I had to try it out and decided to buy. I prefer primes to zooms but a fast standard zoom is just so useful a lens to have that it's something I'd never want to be without. I haven't owned the lens for long but used it a bit around christmas and on a recent trip to Italy it was my main lens, used 90% of the time, which always helps to get to know a new lens. The lens is very well built. Compared to the Tamron, it's more solid (significantly bigger & heavier too) but the difference in build quality is clear, and that's something I appreciate. Unless you really need to minimise size and weight in such a lens, I'd say it's worth it to go for the Sigma. Sharpness is excellent in the centre at all apertures, even wide open. At the corners you need to stop down to f/8 (or maybe even f/11) to get best results, though they never reach the sharpness levels of the centre, at least at the widest focal lengths. I may be being picky here - I've pixel-peeped the corners to check how they are but at normal display sizes they are absolutely nothing to worry about. What has really impressed me with this lens' optical capabilities are the rich colours and contrast that photos have - they're probably as good as those from the DA limited (or other high quality modern primes). Blues especially seem to come out very well. I've seen occasional flare even when using the hood but I had read about that before buying and it's not as bad as I had been expecting from the comments I've read. I've seen much, much worse on other lenses and overall I'd say it does pretty well in this regard. The almost silent auto focus really is nice to have. In terms of accuracy I'd say it's slightly better than the Tamron, but only very slightly. It has the occasional slight mis-focus but that happens with all my lenses and I attribute it to the camera. The quiet AF is a luxury - nice to have but with no effect on the photos. This is my only K-mount lens with an inbuilt lens motor. Overall, I'd say I'm very happy with the lens. It could be sharper in the corners, it could be a bit more resistant to flare and if it zoomed in the same direction as all my other lenses then that would be great, but these are relatively minor complaints. Compared to the Tamron I'd say it's optically on the same level. The Tamron might even have a slight edge with better sharpness in the corners and better flare resistance. In other aspects the Sigma is better - the AF motor, slightly more accurate AF, a slight advantage in colour and contrast, much better build quality. However, the size and weight differences are considerable and for those who like their equipment to be light, the Sigma may not be for you. Update: I should mention that I have had a lot of problems with erratic exposure using this lens - either over or under exposure. On my trip to Italy I ended up using five-shot bracketing and deleting the four excess photos after choosing the best exposed one. I need to play around with some other exposure modes to see if the lens works better with them, but I'd recommend bracketing or using manual exposure and always shooting RAW when using this lens. This really is a superb all-round lens which is very nearly as close to perfect for general use as it's possible to get. I'll finish off with some sample images which I hope convey the results that this lens can achieve. The first three images were taken wide open. https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4709/39590344702_447e7b6eb0_c.jpg Venice by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4743/39590331302_1ba0bc8e40_c.jpg Venice by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4752/38792396375_81ae102759_c.jpg Florence by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4693/27505828599_943227463c_c.jpg IMGP3212a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4753/24915939917_e8a091ac6c_c.jpg Rome by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4650/26048736208_c0a5601d08_c.jpg Tuscany by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4704/25848310398_89bde3368d_c.jpg Florence by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4758/26472283088_6bc0b93c58_c.jpg ITLY3455b by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm1.staticflickr.com/961/40430543100_ee23e2854d_c.jpg ITLY3593a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Tokina RMC / SMZ105 35-105mm F3.5-4.3 by Jonathan Mac on Sun March 5, 2017 | Rating: 6 View more reviews 
Tokina_Front_View.jpg

Views: 77406
Reviews: 10
I bought this lens in order to have a walk-around zoom for use on old manual film cameras, but I don't think I ever used it like that, I'm too much of a fan of primes. I used it a few times on my DSLRs but the problem was that photos always looked very flat and dull, so I sold it. It's a very solidly built lens - heavy with smooth focusing and aperture ring, which make it pleasant to use. Common to all the old Tokina lenses I've tried the aperture ring is in full stops only, which is irritating. Close focus is not very close at all and the lens has to be put into close focus mode to use that feature, otherwise the minimum focus distance is quite long (1.3m if memory serves). Wide open the lens isn't very sharp but I've seen a lot worse. Stopped down it's pretty sharp but then you're at f/5.6 already and that's very limiting. The biggest problem is that contrast and saturation are very poor on this lens so any photos taken with it will look dull. It may be possible to massage some life into them in PP but when there are so many lenses out there where that isn't necessary, why bother? There are plenty of old lenses that are a lot worse than this one, but there are lenses which are a lot better too. I'd add some sample photos but this lens didn't produce any worth keeping before I sold it.

Review of: Yashinon DS-M 50mm F1.4 by Jonathan Mac on Thu May 19, 2016 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
yashinon-dsm-50f1_4.JPG

Views: 65700
Reviews: 5
Having now used this lens on an M42 film camera as well as on digital, I feel much better able to evaluate it. The filter size is 55mm. This lens has no auto/manual switch so on digital it can only be used wide open. With an adaptor or a modification to hold the aperture pin in it could be used stopped down but there's no obvious way into the lens either at the front or the back to allow a modification. Some M42 to K adapters will stop down but I only trust and own the Pentax ones, which don't do this. The aperture ring only clicks at full aperture stops and it goes to f/16. There are only six aperture blades but they're rounded. The aperture is almost perfectly round at f/2 and almost round at f/2.8. Beyond that the rounded blades don't look like they make much difference compared to normal straight blades. The build quality is very good and solid. The aperture and focus rings move smoothly and the aperture has rounded blades which should yield better bokeh when stopped down. Mine had the rubber focus ring a bit loose so I used a bit of glue to stick it down and now it's fine. Below are a couple of shots taken wide open on APS-C digital at f/1.4 to test sharpness, though these images have had slight increases in contrast and sharpening. The lens seems fairly sharp wide open but with some green fringing in the out-of-focus areas. https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7325/26513129583_0ca3fcfb51_c.jpg DSCF1009a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7436/27022520082_7e43133351_c.jpg DSCF1014a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Update - some wide open shots. It's quite soft and glowy with some funky bokeh but useable for small display sizes. Whatever sharpening has been applied by Flickr has improved the look of these somewhat. https://c7.staticflickr.com/8/7600/27817247222_b6fef66ddf_c.jpg Yashinon 50mm f/1.4 M42 wide open by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7343/27306403504_a00654366c_c.jpg 2016-06-26_08-38-40 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c6.staticflickr.com/8/7110/27841942061_27e2948f29_c.jpg 2016-06-26_08-49-54 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Further update - film! I've now shot a roll of Fuji Acros in a Yashica Electro AX camera, almost exclusively with this lens. The handling is superb, everything moves very, very smoothly and, most importantly, I've very impressed with the image quality. On film this lens appears very sharp, even wide open. Of course, this is black & white so no colour fringing. I have to say it was a real pleasure shooting with this lens and for use on film it's without doubt a keeper, better than the SMC Takumar 50/1.4. I can't wait to load another roll and take it out again. In summary - on an M42 film camera this is one of the best fast fifties I've ever used, it's nothing short of superb. The lack of A/M switch and only full-stop aperture ring are minor problems that are forgotten in the pleasure of using such a great lens. On digital, unless you have a good adapter which allows the aperture to be stopped down (or you're willing to modify the lens internally) then it's not much use except for the occasional shallow DoF shot for fun. The fringing wide open could be a problem too. I don't know at what point this fringing would disappear when stopping down, because I can't test it. I've knocked off a point for the aperture ring and the lack of A/M switch (how much would it really have cost to add this???) but for it's intended use it's a solid 9. This first shot was wide open or at f/2 https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8528/29361958015_6bca91483b_c.jpg Yashica Electro AX, Fuji Acros, Summer 001a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8467/29328566536_1f47be74a7_c.jpg Yashica Electro AX, Fuji Acros, Summer 020a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8429/29328355616_c60a0945b7_c.jpg Yashica Electro AX, Fuji Acros, Summer 004a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8371/28740691383_65df5a154f_c.jpg Yashica Electro AX, Fuji Acros, Summer 011a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Tamron SP AF XR LD Aspherical IF Di II 17-50mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Wed May 18, 2016 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
SHOT6248.JPG

Views: 322417
Reviews: 90
This was the first good autofocus lens I bought for my DSLR and it has impressed me since the first day. Even now, owning all the DA limited lenses, this one gets plenty of use and is especially useful on holidays or at events when I need to travel light and don't want to swap lenses all the time or use just one prime. The lens is fairly well built but does have a bit of a plasticky feel. After around three years of use the rubber on the zoom ring seems to have expanded slightly and is now a bit slack, but still firmly stuck to the barrel and working perfectly. Manual focus, although I don't use that much, feels a little gritty but is useable. Update 02/02/2018 - After owning this lens for over five years, the front end (where the hood attaches) has partially broken and had to be super-glued back on. It's not a major problem and given how much I've used it, it's hardly surprising that it starts to show it's mileage. Still, the break show that the quality of the plastic used in it's construction is not the highest. The image quality from this lens is incredible, especially given the price when compared to other similar models from other manufacturers. Wide open it's very sharp and only gets better stopping down. The colours and contrast are great and there's very little flare. The only qualm I have about the IQ is at 17mm the extreme edges of the frame are distorted. This won't be noticeable for a landscape shot or if the edges are out of focus, but for wide group shots of people it's advisable to avoid having anyone at the very edge because faces can become distorted. Overall this lens has fantastic image quality, a decent zoom range and all at a very good price. It's the lens I recommend to people who are getting into DSLRs and I always tell them to spend less on the camera and buy this lens as it'll make a world of difference to their images. Update 08/07/2018: After many years of use, I've now sold the Tamron as I picked up Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and found I preferred it (you can find my review of that lens in the Sigma zooms section). There's very little difference in the optics and results of the two lenses but the Sigma has an in-lens AF motor and is much better built, though also bigger and heavier. Go for the Tamron if your budget is limited, you don't care about quiet AF or small size and low weight are important to you. Go for the Sigma if you're willing to spend a little more, appreciate quiet AF or like your lenses to be solidly built. I still wouldn't hesitate to recommend the Tamron, especially to a beginner who wants good results from their new DSLR without breaking the bank. Sample shots below. Stopped down for landscapes: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/380/18769892728_ae1cccbed4_c.jpg IMGP4682 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm1.staticflickr.com/553/19171804791_7dc5469fd6_c.jpg Sunset on the beach, Washington state by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm1.staticflickr.com/520/18436226854_a83d147be6_c.jpg IMGP5265 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Wide open for shallow depth of field or low-light use: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5722/22612687031_cf1265fc85_c.jpg Córdoba fountains by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5748/22116923978_16fb13ef8e_c.jpg 1189 Vietnam - Hue - Restaurante Ancient Hue (IMGP0868a) by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5742/22636856162_561741a1aa_c.jpg IMGP6833 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3915/19366384716_a75d427dc6_c.jpg Off the grid in black and white by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Some newer images: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8671/28016982950_75e63c88ce_c.jpg Oslo by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7746/28123445600_4322b1e9e5_c.jpg Gamla Stan, Stockholm by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2886/33929575245_577622dae0_c.jpg IMGP7732a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Tokina RMC / SL135 135mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Sun March 27, 2016 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
RMC_Tokina_135mm.jpg

Views: 95996
Reviews: 14
I haven't used this lens extensively (I'm not much of a telephoto user) but when I compare this to my other 135mm lenses (M 135/3.5, Vivitar 135/2.8 M42) this one clearly comes out on top. Build quality is fantastic - it's incredibly solid, the focusing ring is very smooth and the aperture ring clicks nicely. Image quality is superb. At f/2.8 it's acceptably sharp and by f/4 it's really sharp. Colour and contrast are very nice, as is the bokeh. The pull-out lens hood is short but handy to have and does the job adequately. I've never had any problems with flare with this lens. The down-sides to this lens are the weight due to the solid build and that the aperture ring only moves in full f-stops. That's not much of a problem with a digital camera but on a film camera which only allows shutter speed changes in full f-stops it can be annoying not to have much precision in the exposure. Overall I'd highly recommend this lens. It's fast, extremely well-build and has great image quality. All-round a much better option than the far more common "M" series f/3.5 lens. I've now added a copy in SR mount to use on my Minolta cameras and it performs just as well as the K-mount copy. Here are some sample shots. The black and white ones were taken on film and the low contrast is due to my poor scanning & PP skills, but they serve to some degree to show sharpness and bokeh, though sharpness is also limited due to scanning and the limitations of the film. The film ones were all taken wide open or at f/4 I believe. https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2907/13893589670_bf25bc9550_c.jpg IMGP9964a Tok_135_2.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7349/13893599410_f7d117318e_c.jpg IMGP9901a Tok_135_2.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Taken at f/4: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1561/24485802879_aea0406809_c.jpg DSCF0160a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Adding some shots on full-frame (Lumix S5): https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52178849356_3917e286b2_b.jpg Croc II by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52178861631_e4fe90fa92_b.jpg Pelicans II by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52179341375_d4842b8950_b.jpg Butterfly by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr And on film (not very good scans): GP1189a[/url] by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3938/15140823753_f03eb37089_c.jpg IMGP1187a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Revuenon MC 50mm F1.4 by Jonathan Mac on Wed March 16, 2016 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
image12.jpg

Views: 145044
Reviews: 19
I bought this lens quite cheaply having read a few reviews and I'm extremely happy with it. My copy is in almost mint condition. The build quality and image quality are very similar to my M & K 50mm f/1.4 lenses and IQ is better than the (seven element) Takumar. The A-R is possibly slightly more dreamy wide open but I've managed to get some close-focus shots at f/1.4 which I really like and which look sharp enough for most purposes. Focus is very smooth and the aperture ring clicks nicely. Like the Pentax manual 50/1.4s there's no click between f/1.4 and f/2 but there is at f/2.4. Wide open it's a bit dreamy, by f/2 it's significantly better, at f/2.4 it's very good and at f/2.8 it's very sharp. Beyond that it's super sharp. There's no unpleasant colour cast as with some third-party lenses and bokeh is generally superb. Given that the image and build quality is virtually on a par with Pentax-made equivalents but it costs significantly less, I'd say this is possibly the best value 50mm f/1.4 manual lens around. Highly recommended. Some sample shots, the first two taken wide open. https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1720/25259992931_2125a9a19a_c.jpg Leaf by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1626/25708231902_4c19e1650f_c.jpg Auto Revuenon 50mm f/1.4 quinto de los molinos by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1511/25202324423_5bff5ca03c_c.jpg Auto Revuenon 50mm f/1.4 quinto de los molinos by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1470/25828966185_7134b6c361_c.jpg Auto Revuenon 50mm f/1.4 quinto de los molinos by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1680/25198723824_66286885d3_c.jpg Auto Revuenon 50mm f/1.4 quinto de los molinos by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Update - added some photos taken on film (Kodak T-Max 400 and scanned on an Epson V500). Any lack of sharpness is a result of the scanning, not the lens itself. https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8088/29695129902_3886df5201_c.jpg SFXn, T-Max 400 015a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8389/29695131862_e1b22d20a6_c.jpg SFXn, T-Max 400 031a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8352/29515299500_56bd1aac52_c.jpg SFXn, T-Max 400 024a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8533/29695132832_dd4097d925_c.jpg SFXn, T-Max 400 022a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Sigma UC 28-70mm F2.8-4 by Jonathan Mac on Wed February 10, 2016 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
Sigma_Lens_1.JPG

Views: 55390
Reviews: 5
This is a small, light general-purpose zoom. It's well built for an AF lens, about the level (if a little better) than the Pentax 18-55mm kit lens. It's at 28mm when fully extended and 70mm when retracted, which I like because it means the lens is at it's smallest at the long end, so good for portraits. The front element turns when focusing and, because the hood locks onto the rotating end of the lens, if you don't disengage the AF when adding/removing the hood then you'll force the AF motor and potentially damage it. That's a very poor design decision and it's a bit annoying to have to remember to disengage the AF every time. The lens is soft wide open at 28mm and doesn't really become acceptable until f/4, then it's better at f/5.6 and more so at f/8. By 35mm it's already much better wide open (f/3.5) and usable. From 35mm onwards the lens is quite sharp wide open, but benefits from being stopped down. Still, it's usable wide open for most of the range. The lens never gets really, really sharp no matter how much it's stopped down (my benchmark for sharpness is the DA 35mm limited) but it's pretty good. For some strange reason this lens autofocuses fine on all my film and digital cameras except the SFXn. I assume there's a software/firmware incompatibility between the lens and this specific camera model. Overall I like the lens, it's a solid performer though due to the focal length and speed I use it more on my AF film cameras than on digital. On film it's extremely useful and is the only zoom I've used that I would consider using in place of a handful of primes. On digital it's OK but the focal length isn't so useful. Here are a couple of photos taken at 28mm on film. Don't let my poor scanning put you off - this is really just to show the angle of view. https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1710/24853370026_21fd80d3e4_c.jpg Kodak Colorplus 200, MZ-6 031a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1495/24761388032_21e0b81538_c.jpg Kodak Colorplus 200, MZ-6 025a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Here's one more shot to show the size difference between this lens and a Sigma zoom with the same focal length but constant f/2.8 throughout the range. The size (and weight) difference is huge. https://farm1.staticflickr.com/731/21551206892_63fcb04280_c.jpg Pentax MZ-6 with Sigma UC 28-70mm f/2.8 - f/4 & MZ-5N with Sigma EX DF 28-70mm f/2.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Vivitar Macro Focusing 75-205mm F3.8 by Jonathan Mac on Sun September 20, 2015 | Rating: 7 View more reviews 
PICT0012.jpg

Views: 151010
Reviews: 25
This lens is very solidly built, extremely heavy and quite big. The size and weight make it difficult to handle and I never let it hang from my DSLR for fear it might rip the mount off the camera if jerked. It's soft wide open to the extent that it's not useable, at least on digital. At f/5.6 it's useable but I usually stop it down to f/8 or further to get a good sharp result. I think that's not too bad for an old zoom - I've tried some which don't sharpen up no matter how much you stop down and this lens is certainly sharper than the much more modern Pentax DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6. Contrast is a bit low at any aperture, as can be expected for a lens with old, inferior coatings, but it's not too bad and is easily fixed. It's very important to note that the rear flange which protects the aperture lever is far longer than it needs to be. It must be removed or cut down to avoid damaging and SLR with the electrical contacts originally used for power zoom, now used for in-lens AF motors. You will damage your camera if you try to mount it without first doing this. If you're prepared to work around these shortcomings it is a pleasant lens to use and can produce good results, probably better than the average old third-party zoom. The softness before f/8 and the weight stop this lens from getting taken out more. Samples: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3843/14550930876_d84a2bb899_c.jpg IMGP8059a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3724/12719808263_7ba1bc4444_c.jpg IMGP7158a Viv75-205 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8658/16590932926_6f5875b052_c.jpg IMGP1677a Viv 75-205_3.8 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5485/12719642955_b0b72d343f_c.jpg IMGP7161a Viv75-205 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Vivitar (Komine 28xxxx) MC Close Focus Wide Angle 28mm F2.0 by Jonathan Mac on Sun September 20, 2015 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
Vivitar_Top.jpg

Views: 110992
Reviews: 8
I got a pretty good deal on this lens a few years back but I haven't used it a huge amount because 28mm isn't really my favourite focal length on either digital or film. However, this is a worthwhile lens to have, especially on film. It's built like a tank - the build quality is substantially more solid than that of Takumars or K or M series Pentax lenses. The aperture ring is a pleasure to turn, the clicks are perfect. Focus is silky smooth. The lens is very heavy for it's size. On digital the lens lacks a bit of contrast in general, as you would expect from the old coatings. It's not the sharpest wide open but it's useable for many purposes and by f/4 it's very sharp indeed. When I compared this lens to a few Pentax 28mm primes I found this one had a bit of a green cast, but on automatic white balance it's not noticeable at all. I have found this lens to be far more useful on film than on digital. On film it's a proper wide angle and the slight lack of sharpness wide open isn't noticeable at all. I love using it with B&W film especially and it allows for relatively slow film to be used in lower light than it's more common f/2.8 cousins. If it weren't so heavy it would have to vie with the M 35mm f/2 for the chance go travelling when I go. If you're a film user I'd recommend going out of your way to get this lens, but on APS-C digital it's nice to have and can produce very pleasant results but it's nothing spectacular optically. Having said that, it's almost worth having just for the sheer pleasure of using such a well put-together item. Digital shots: f/4 https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5778/21334233050_03b0859306_c.jpg IMGP5511a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr f/8 https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5690/21522295845_4a107b791f_c.jpg IMGP5508a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Unknown aperture https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5550/12719552673_8e4bf169b4_c.jpg IMGP7216a Viv28f2 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Unknown aperture https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3823/12719619233_b903c95fff_c.jpg IMGP7144a Viv28f2 by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr Film shots: f/2.4 or f/2.8 https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5610/15140815473_281446fc15_c.jpg IMGP1192a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr f/2.4 or f/2.8 https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5614/15760232215_9b1081387f_c.jpg IMGP1195a by Jonathan MacDonald, on Flickr

Review of: Tamron 278D AF 80-210mm F4.5-5.6 by Jonathan Mac on Fri May 15, 2015 | Rating: 6 View more reviews 
IMGP5315.jpg

Views: 55158
Reviews: 11
I picked up this lens for €25 and decided to take a chance. It's average size for the focal lengths covered, but very light. The build quality isn't the best but I've seen a lot worse and the focusing and zoom are very smooth indeed. The aperture ring also clicks nicely. AF is fast but not exceptionally so. This lens doesn't produce the sharpest results at any aperture. There's virtually no change in this aspect stopping down to smaller apertures or at different focal lengths. It's not really sharp enough to be acceptable wide open and stays that way. Purple fringing is the same - it's always present to some degree at every aperture setting and focal length. The focusing ring, in fact the whole extending zoom barrel, not only turns when focusing but as you focus closer the focusing ring moves away from the camera, which is annoying and makes manual focusing tricky. Image quality isn't great but it's not terrible either. The light weight and nice feel of the lens make me like it overall. I plan to mostly use it on film where I doubt either the resolution or fringing will be noticeable at all.

Review of: Vivitar (komine) Auto Telephoto 135mm F2.8 by Jonathan Mac on Sun November 9, 2014 | Rating: 9 View more reviews 
Vivitar_135mm_prime_f-2_8.jpg

Views: 251978
Reviews: 28
I have an M42-mount, 5-element version with eight aperture blades. This lens is very sharp wide open and quite compact for an old 35/2.8, though it's bigger and heavier than the "M" series 135/3.5. It's the only M42 135mm lens I have and I have no need for any others as this one is so good. The short pull-out lens hood is handy, especially as this lens has a fairly uncommon 55mm filter thread, this means I don't need to bother packing a separate hood when I take this lens out. Focus is extremely smooth and the aperture ring clicks very nicely. Highly recommended.

Review of: Sigma II Macro 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 by Jonathan Mac on Sat December 10, 2011 | Rating: 4 View more reviews 
Sigma-28-80mm-1-3_5-5_6-II-Macro.jpg

Views: 116566
Reviews: 24
I had this for a while but didn't use it much. The 1:2 macro is it's redeeming feature, if it has one, as it's better magnification than most pseudo-macro lenses offer. It's only at 80mm though, hence the maximum aperture using macro is f/5.6, so you'll need a LOT of light or a tripod (but then that's true for any real macro work). It's probably the cheapest way to get this kind of macro capability, even more so than reversing rings or extension tubes, and you'll have auto everything too, which you lose with those options. The IQ in general use is so-so at best. Sharpness is not great and there's a greenish/yellowish colour cast. COntrast is average. It's build reasonably well, quite solidly, but the macro switch does not inspire confidence & the zoom and focus rings to not operate smoothly. The lens hood is not petal-shaped and attached to the main barrel, not the front which moves on focusing, so I doubt it's very effective. In macro mode, the front element is BEYOND the end of the hood, rendering it completely useless. I've reommended it but with the caveats of price, and only then if you want it for the macro mode, I wouldn't recommend this lens for general use.

Review of: Sigma Macro 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 by Jonathan Mac on Tue July 28, 2009 | Rating: 8 View more reviews 
foo.jpg

Views: 80875
Reviews: 22
I paid €29 for this lens so it was certainly a bargain. I have the version two which has a metal fitting rather than plastic so itīs probably more robust than the others reviewed here. I donīt know if there are optical or other differences. The lens auto-focuses fast because the throw is so small, but that makes it very difficult to manually focus. The macro mode locks the lens at 80mm & allows a far larger throw for focusing, so itīs easy to manually focus in macro mode. The lens hood, very strangely, attaches to the barrel in such a way that it does not extend with the front element when zooming or focusing. When in macro mode the front element extends beyond the end of the hood, making it completely useless. The hood needs a bit of force to attach so itīs best left on & not removed, it doesnīt take up much extra space. Iīve taken some good macros with the lens (it has 1:2 magnification). Itīs not the sharpest but decent & the colour is good. The zoom ring is smooth, the focusing ring less so but not too bad. For the money itīs a bargain, mainly for the macro function.



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:35 PM. | 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