| Showing all 14 reviews by E-man | |
| Review of: Vivitar Series 1 VMC Macro Focusing Zoom 28-105mm F2.8-3.8 by E-man on Mon December 16, 2019 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 82849
Reviews: 9
|
This lens recently came to me with a K20D and two other lenses, which is why I left the price paid blank. Separating that out from the entire $150 lot would be entirely subjective. That said, I really like the lens. It has a solid feel--gotta love vintage metal hardware--and the optics are nice and crisp. Optically, the lens is surprisingly bright and sharp but handling is a bit awkward, given that it is manual focus and uses a push-pull zoom mechanism. It's also really long for its range of focal lengths. There are far more compact options available. I don't know how much use it will actually get, but it's an interesting addition to my collection.
| |
| Review of: Vivitar Auto 50mm F2.0 by E-man on Sat January 13, 2018 | Rating: 6 | View more reviews | |
Views: 5724
Reviews: 1
|
So I got this little lens as sort of a bonus piece, thrown into a bundle with a Takumar-A 2X Teleconverter. I know nothing about it other than what I can see. It's made in Japan and I think it might be made by Cosina, given that it has an eight-digit serial number, beginning with a 9, just like my Vivitar 28mm f2.8 lens. Its six-blade aperture only stops down to f16. Given that I had zero expectations about this lens' performance, I can say I am not disappointed. On my K10D, the lens will only operate wide open and as such, it has a very shallow depth of field. It's ridiculously soft shooting distant objects, like the side of my barn but it's surprisingly sharp shooting close up and produces a pleasing bokeh. I'm not sure whether I will keep this lens and if I do, I doubt it will see much use. It isn't very well suited for use on an autofocus DSLR body and would likely be at its best as a starter lens on something fully manual like a K1000.
Note: the $12 cost listed above represents a somewhat generous portion of the $27 I paid for this lens and the Takumar-A 2X Teleconverter together. I have arbitrarily assigned $15 of the purchase price to the teleconverter. In the very likely event that I sell the lens, I will adjust the cost to show the price for which I sold it as I believe that will be a more accurate assessment of its true market value.
| |
| Review of: Sigma Zoom Master AF MC 35-70mm F3.5-4.5 by E-man on Thu March 9, 2017 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 27722
Reviews: 7
|
I didn't need this lens at all. There really was no reason at all for me to buy it—none whatsoever. Given the other lenses I own, it is completely superfluous but for the price of a fast food meal (which I also don't need), I just couldn't resist it. And since it was so ridiculously inexpensive, I didn't really have much of any expectation for this lens so it was almost impossible to be too terribly disappointed. The good news is I'm not disappointed at all.
The lens is in excellent condition overall. It has obviously never seen any rough use. The only scratches are on the front lens cap (it came with both original caps and a UV filter), which means it's been doing its job. The aperture is snappy and oil free and the glass has no sign of dirt or fungus. Images I've captured with it so far are sharp with a fairly pleasing bokeh, not the best I've ever seen but definitely not the worst, either.
The lens is well constructed with a metal barrel and metal bayonet mount--the way lenses should be made. Its construction appears similar to a Sigma Epsilon lens of similar focal range that I briefly had a few years ago but the autofocus on this one is much more accurate, which is a good thing since the manual focus ring is almost nonexistent. The lens is also surprisingly compact for a zoom, barely larger than some primes I've seen, which gives it pleasant handling qualities. Being a film era lens, it was originally intended to cover a range from wide(ish) angle to very short telephoto. On a DSLR body, it's range covers the equivalent of 52-105mm (normal to short telephoto) which may actually turn out to be a bit more useful. Will this lens see frequent use? I doubt it. But it was definitely worth giving up a burger and fries for.
| |
| Review of: Vivitar (PK-A, 98xxxxx = cosina) 28mm F2.8 by E-man on Thu January 26, 2017 | Rating: 7 | View more reviews | |
Views: 21222
Reviews: 6
|
So I impulsively picked this little legacy lens up for a "Hamilton" because it was in NOS condition and in that respect, it did not disappoint. It's in its original box with all the paperwork, three pieces with print dates ranging from 1986, 1990 and 1995. Honestly, this thing looks like it's never been used, no signs of wear at all. It does have the dreaded Ricoh pin but while I briefly considered performing a 'pin-ectomy', but I ultimately decided it wasn't necessary. The pin is very, very tiny, really just a rounded bump that sticks up about the thickness of a fingernail and doesn't cause a problem with the two Pentax bodies I've tried it on. It twists on and off just as smoothly as any other lens. The trick is to put the camera into manual focus mode before installing the lens and turning the camera on so that the autofocus shaft stays retracted. Besides, it really would have been a shame to molest such a pristine looking lens.
Optically, the lens isn't all that great. it's sharp enough in the center but soft at the edges. I don't know that I'll be using it all that much but there might be some situations for it where its inherent weaknesses could be turned to creative advantage. I might have considered sending this lens back for a refund but I couldn't even buy a hamburger with what would be left over after the return postage, so I'll find an out-of-the way spot for it in one of my bags and not give it much further thought.
I stated above that I would not recommend this lens but I need to clarify that a little. My 'no' recommendation would apply mainly to DSLRs. On a legacy 35mm camera like a K1000 or an ME Super, it might just perform a little better, who knows...
UPDATE--I've played with this lens a little more and as I come to better understand its quirks, my results are getting better. They're still not exactly outstanding but they're definitely better than my first impression. As others have noted, it's a flare monster outdoors in the bright sun. A lens hood is a must. Fortunately, I've got a couple I can use. While I'm feeling better about my purchase, I'm still glad it only cost me $10 as it will never be one of my 'first string' lenses.
| |
| Review of: Tamron AF LD Macro 70-300mm F4-5.6 by E-man on Sat January 14, 2017 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 39665
Reviews: 4
|
My Tamron infatuation continues with this latest lens acquisition and I seem to become more of a fan with each one. While I'm not as in love with it as I am with my 28-105mm Tamron that lives on the front of my Kx, it is still a worthy addition to my collection. The lens feels well built and Zooming and focusing are smooth and I don't notice any zoom creep. I just like the feel Tamron's rubber-coated lens barrels. Mine does vary slightly from the one in the photo in that it has the Tamron name molded into the rubber grip in raised letters instead of the ribbed grip. I'm not sure whether that makes it an earlier or later model but it does match my other two Tamrons. The lens delivers sharp Images but colors are slightly muted. Granted, this that could be partly because I took my test shots on an overcast winter afternoon. With that in mind, I may come back and amend my assessment later. But even with that shortcoming in mind, I find the lens to have a pleasant bokeh but it's also nice and sharp, even zoomed to a full 300mm. Interestingly, the camera mistakes this lens for one of four different Sigma models. Although this lens bills itself as a 'tele-macro' lens, it's definitely more 'tele' than 'macro'. While definitely best suited for pulling in distant objects, it will certainly take okay "close-up" photos of smaller objects--albeit from about a yard away--and there is no true macro mode. But all in all, I have other lenses that are far more capable when it comes to macro photography. Still, with a understanding and acceptance of this lens' strengths and limitations, it can be a valuable addition to one's kit.
UPDATE: After owning this lens for eight months with little use, I took it and my K200D to a small outdoor music festival yesterday and it really proved itself. For its focal length, the lens works quite well in low light situations and the always difficult conditions of shooting after dark with only the stage lights for illumination. While I wouldn't put this lens up against a $1,000 professional grade behemoth, it's a great performer for the cheap, second hand lens that it is.
| |
| Review of: Tamron AF Aspherical LD [171D, 271D, 571D, 171A] 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 by E-man on Thu December 29, 2016 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 119862
Reviews: 21
|
Another great Tamron lens. Mine is the earliest variant—171-D. I picked it up on the cheap and definitely got more than my money's worth. The 28-200mm focal length makes this a good choice for those times when I only want to carry one lens. There's a lot to like about this lens. It's sharp, autofocus is responsive, bokeh is pleasant. There are only a few minor negatives. For some reason, colors appear washed out when the lens is extended to its full 200 mm. Backing off slightly improves the image greatly. With a 72mm filter diameter, this lens is quite girthy, to borrow a line from an old hot dog commercial. My hands aren't exactly huge, so it feels like a lot to hold onto. Fortunately, the lens is relatively light for its size and feels well balanced on the camera, even extended to its full 200mm. That said, the build quality seems quite good. Everything's nice and tight, although the zoom ring is almost too tight. I feel like I'm fighting the mechanism when zooming out toward 200 but not when zooming back in toward 28. I have only had this lens a short while and have yet to really put it through its paces yet but I look forward to doing so in the near future. Early indications suggest this lens will have a long term place in my bag.
| |
| Review of: Sigma Aspherical MACRO 28-90mm F3.5-5.6 by E-man on Thu December 29, 2016 | Rating: 7 | View more reviews | |
Views: 26974
Reviews: 6
|
I've had this lens for about a year and a half and use it mainly on my K100D to photograph small items to sell on eBay. It works pretty well for that purpose but I prefer my Tamron 28-105 for more general applications. The only reason I gave this lens a low score for handling is the Normal/Macro switch sticks on it. It'll switch into Macro mode just fine but it often sticks going back into Normal mode. When this happens, I have to remove the lens from the camera and jiggle the aperture tab to get it to release. Fortunately, I mainly use the lens in Macro mode, so that isn't a big problem. It just makes me glad I only paid about $30 for it.
| |
| Review of: Sigma Macro 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 by E-man on Tue December 27, 2016 | Rating: 7 | View more reviews | |
Views: 81591
Reviews: 22
|
I've had this lens for about a year and a half and I mainly use it to photograph small items for eBay listings. It works okay for that purpose but it's not my all-time favorite lens. It has recently developed an annoying habit of not wanting to switch out of Macro mode. The little switch sticks, which locks the zoom at 80mm. To fix it, I have to remove the lens from the camera and jiggle the aperture tab on the base. It will then release, albeit sometimes reluctantly. Fortunately, I have a couple of other lenses that cover the same focal range, so it's no biggie to leave this one in Macro mode.
UPDATE: I have discovered that quirk with the Normal/Macro switch only manifested itself on my K100D. I have not had that problem at all using this lens on my K10D and K30.
ANOTHER UPDATE: The sticky switch has gotten worse recently so I've stopped using it into macro mode and the lens overall sees increasingly less time on a camera.
| |
| Review of: Schneider-Kreuznach (Samsung) 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 D-Xenon by E-man on Sat August 27, 2016 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 27455
Reviews: 4
|
I got this lens a few years ago with a Samsung GX1L camera body after I bricked my *ist-DL in a botched firmware upgrade. Except for the blue trim ring and the more traditional knurled pattern on the zoom and focus rings' rubber grips, it's absolutely identical in every respect to the 18-55mm Pentax DL lens that came with that camera. It's a very respectable and capable kit lens and I continue to enjoy its Pentax counterpart to this day. I gifted the Schneider lens, along with the camera to my then-girlfriend at the time. She was totally thrilled when I gave it to her and as far as I know, she still has it and loves it.
| |
| Review of: Sigma DL 100-300mm F4.5-6.7 by E-man on Thu September 24, 2015 | Rating: 7 | View more reviews | |
Views: 118323
Reviews: 19
|
I seem to have a somewhat rare manual focus variant of this lens—rare enough that I can find no reference online that it even exists. That's why I left the autofocus rating blank. It looks like the lens pictured above and the specs are the same but it has a KA mount instead of a KAF. the contacts on the bayonet base are arranged differently from my other autofocus lenses and it lacks a coupling for the autofocus drive shaft. It's not just missing or broken, it was never there. The mount just has blank metal where it should be. I bought the lens on eBay, assuming it was autofocus, since it was advertised as such, and almost returned it once I realized it wasn't. But then I shot some photos with it and found it performs amazingly well for its focal length. It even takes decent pictures in low light. I tried it out at a small music festival the night after I got it and at dusk I was able to zoom in on individual musicians onstage from 70-80 feet away and get acceptably sharp images with minimal noise and CA, even under multicolored stage lighting, which is no mean feat. Once I grew accustomed to the fact that the lens was manual focus, muscle memory from my 35mm SLR days took over and it was actually kind of fun to use. Even though I arguably paid too much for it at $30, I've decided to keep it. I don't imagine it will get too much regular use, but on those occasions where I need some serious telephoto reach, it will be there in my bag, waiting to go into action.
ADDENDUM (18 Jan 2017)—Over the time I've had this lens, the lack of autofocus has become an increasing source of frustration for me and I have now acquired two candidates for its replacement: a Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6 and a Pentax FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6. I'm still playing with both of these to determine which will be the ultimate 'keeper' but this lens is eBay bound.
| |
| Review of: Tamron AF (IF) 79D/179D 28-105mm F4-5.6 by E-man on Mon August 31, 2015 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 74189
Reviews: 15
|
I think I've got a new favorite lens here. This is the first Tamron lens I've ever owned and so far, I like it very much. As with all my Pentax-related gear, I picked this lens up on eBay for about $30 with shipping. The net purchase price was $23.88. It came with both caps and the tulip-shaped lens hood, and except for a few scratches on the end cap, it's in excellent condition. One of the first things I noticed about this lens upon unpacking it was its girth. The 62mm filter diameter tells almost the whole story. I say almost because the lens is surprisingly comfortable in my not-so-huge hand. The zoom and focus rings are very responsive and have just the right amount of tension on them—light enough to be operated with a feather touch but not so light as to be 'fiddly'. The autofocus is quick and accurate and the optics are nice and sharp. Despite its plastic construction, metal bayonet base notwithstanding, the build quality feels good; in fact, the lens feels very good on my K-x. That body and lens feel well balanced together and they seem to like each other The autofocus on my K-x seems to hunt less with this lens than with any of my others. I have yet to try the lens on my K-2000 or my K-100D, but I'd expect similar performance on them. I only have taken a few shots with this camera so far, but I have so far been more than satisfied with the results. Images are sharp but not harsh. Colors are natural looking—pleasantly saturated but not overly so, and there are no noticeable aberrations or optical artifacts. It also seems to handle low light situations better than my other lenses. Perhaps the larger diameter is helping there as well. Although not a macro, the lens isn't bad for close up work. I also like the extra bit of telephoto reach the lens has over my Sigma 28-80 Macro zoom. I think this is a superb lens for the money and it has now become the default lens for my Kx.
| |
| Review of: Sigma Epsilon 28-70mm F3.5-4.5 by E-man on Fri August 21, 2015 | Rating: 5 | View more reviews | |
Views: 39531
Reviews: 4
|
I really wanted to love this lens, honest I did. But you know what, I'm just not feelin' it. I got it on eBay for $25 plus $6 for shipping and thought I'd gotten a nice, basic 'walkin' around' lens to leave on my K-x. I've been playing with it all week but I'm just not satisfied with its performance. I like it's sleek, metal construction but my all-too-plastic Quantaray 28-90mm f3.5-5.6 Aspherical lens just leaves it in the dust.
The focus on this lens is at best a little on the soft side and tends to want to bring the wrong things into focus. The lens hunts way too much when focusing, even in bright sunlight, and sometimes just seems to give up and focus somewhere in the middle distance, leaving just about everything out of focus. To make matters worse, manual focusing on this lens is essentially nonexistent because there is no manual focusing ring. yeah, there is literally nothing out there to grip onto without a filter screwed into place. Although the zoom ring has a nice rubber grip on it, turning the thing is like trying to parallel park a '55 Oldsmobile with no power steering. It takes an more effort than I feel it should
The images this lens has yielded have been blah at best. Nothing about them grabs the eye. Contrast is flat, bokeh is blah, even when well composed, they just have a lifeless quality to them. compared to images taken with my other lenses.
Just as an experiment, I tried this lens on my K100D, the oldest Pentax body I own, and it actually performs a little better there. The images aren't much better but the autofocus doesn't act up as much. For now I'm leaving this lens paired up with the K100D since I since that camera doesn't get very much use these days and neither will that lens.
UPDATE: I ended up selling this lens at a slight loss after owning it a couple of months and I honestly haven't missed it.
| |
| Review of: Sigma UC 70-210mm F4-5.6 by E-man on Sun September 22, 2013 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 118679
Reviews: 12
|
I paid a whopping $15 for this lens when I got my first Pentax DSLR a little over a year ago to supplement the 18-55mm kit lens that came with it. I really wasn't sure what to expect, but I knew the good reputation of Sigma lenses and I figured that for the price, I had little to lose. As it turned out, I ended up getting much more than my money's worth. I've been very pleased with the images I've captured with this lens.
This lens gets a little bit of a bad rap for having a push-pull zoom mechanism, but that's not a problem for me as the zoom lenses I had for my 35mm SLRs worked exactly the same way. My only real criticism of the lens is there's almost no resistance to the manual focus ring. I'm not sure whether that's typical of this model or a quirk of my particular copy.
UPDATE: It's hard to believe I've had this lens for four years now. It's still one of my favorites. Ever since I got it, I've wanted to find the original hood to go with it and this week, that wish came true when I spotted the identical lens with a Nikon mount, including the shade, on eBay and picked it up for $18, including shipping. I figured the Nikon mount would make it pretty easy to flip and own the shade for little or nothing. And I was right! I sold the lens--sans shade--last night for $24.50, plus shipping. So now I have the lens with its hood for a net cost of about $9. That's a sweet deal in my book. I'm happy to have the proper shade that doesn't cast a shadow around the edges of the frame. I also determined that the lack of tension on the focus ring must be common to that lens as the one on the Nikon mount lens is only slightly tighter than on mine.
| |
| Review of: Quantaray version 5 ----- 28-90mm F3.5-5.6 by E-man on Sun September 22, 2013 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 37630
Reviews: 6
|
My dad has this same lens for his Nikon DSLR, so I kind of knew what I was getting into when I bought it a year ago for $32 on eBay. For a budget priced lens, it does okay and it fits the middle range of focal lengths between my other two lenses, a Pentax 18-55mm zoom and a Sigma 70-210mm zoom. It's not quite as sharp as either of these lenses, I can't say I'm at all dissatisfied. The one area of concern for me is the plastic lens mount. I always feel like I've got to take extra care to keep from breaking it off when I have the lens mounted on one of my cameras.
Update: 7/31/17: I now have Dad's Nikon D50 with this lens attached. One major (at least to me) difference between the Pentax and Nikon mount versions is the Nikon mount is metal instead of plastic.
| |
