| Review of: Tokina AT-X 242 AF 24-200mm F3.5-5.6 by JJJPhoto on Wed August 20, 2008 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 33361
Reviews: 4
|
I'm not a fan of all-in-one zooms unless they're cheap and reasonably good. Luckily, the Tokina 24-200mm fits that description. Outdoors in good light or indoors with flash this lens is as good as any all-in-one lens I've used ... if not better.
My particular sample of the 24-200mm is a little soft wide open at the 24mm end of the lens, but it gets sharp stopped down to f/5.6. The longer focal lengths seem to be sharper on my copy of this lens.
The build quality is MUCH better on this lens than on the 28-200mm, 28-300mm, or 18-200mm lenses I've tried. I feel like I can knock this lens around and not worry about it. AF is fine but a little noisy.
The big benefit of this lens is you can frequently find it used for $250 or less while the 18-200mm and 18-250mm lenses aren't that cheap. If you're going to make sacrifices in terms of image quality by using an all-in-one you might as well get a cheap one.
While I tend to shoot mostly with fast primes or fast zoom lenses, the 24-200mm is a good compromise when I need extreme flexibility and don't need fast apertures.
| |
| Review of: Sigma EX DG Aspherical DG DF Macro 28mm F1.8 by JJJPhoto on Wed August 6, 2008 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 85248
Reviews: 13
|
Overall, I love this prime lens. Thanks to the 1.5X crop factor on the K10D this lens reminds me more of the FA 43mm Limited on a film camera ... only this lens is physically larger and heavier.
Sigma technically lists this lens as a f/1.8 lens, but both the K10D and *ist DL report the aperture as f/1.7 when wide open ... and the EXIF data also indicates f/1.7 when wide open. I'm not sure what to believe (1.7 or 1.8) but either way this prime is nice and fast in low light.
This lens isn't as sharp wide open as the Pentax FA 28mm f/2.8 ... but that's just the difference you expect between f/1.7-f/1.8 and f/2.8 so it's acceptable in my mind. When this lens is stopped down to f/2.8-f/4 I consider it to produce similar results to the Pentax FA 28mm f/2.8 ... and that's why I sold the Pentax lens and kept this one.
If you can tolerate the size and weight of this lens it's absolutely worth the money. I actually like it better than the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 because the 28mm f/1.8 (or f/1.7) isn't as soft wide open as the 30mm f/1.4 is.
If you're looking for a fast 28mm prime, you'll have a hard time finding a better lens than this one ... unless you're willing to sacrifice speed for sharpness.
| |
| Review of: Sigma EX Circular Fisheye 8mm F4 by JJJPhoto on Wed August 6, 2008 | Rating: 8 | View more reviews | |
Views: 16378
Reviews: 2
|
This is my favorite wide-angle lens but it isn't perfect. The Sigma 8mm gives you the widest angle I've seen for the Pentax, but since it's a fisheye you get huge distortion that you either have to live with or correct in post processing.
It's called a "circular" fisheye but it only gives you a full circle on full-frame sensors and film ... so the APS-C sensors used in current Pentax DSLRs (as of August 2008) won't give you a full circle. You get black corners and sides in the landscape orientation, so once again you have to either live with it or correct (crop) in post processing.
Because the DOF is so huge it's easy for the AF sensor on all cameras to be thrown off ... so sometimes you think you have correct focus but you're actually front-focused or back-focused. However, when the focus is correct this is a VERY sharp fisheye at the center of the frame.
The cup-style lens cap isn't as nice as I'd like. the sides have a thin felt/velvet lining to protect the front element, but the lining should be a little thicker and there is no protective lining on the reverse side of the actual lens cap that directly faces the front element.
In the end I still like this lens more than the Pentax DA 10-17mm fisheye, but you have to do extra work in post processing if you want a full-frame image.
| |
| Review of: LZOS Jupiter-9 MC M42 85mm F2 by JJJPhoto on Thu April 3, 2008 | Rating: 9 | View more reviews | |
Views: 175536
Reviews: 22
|
I can't believe no one else has reviewed this lens before me. The Jupiter 9 is a post-WWII copy of the Zeiss 85mm Sonnar originally developed in the 1930s. The Soviet army "acquired" the design during their time in Germany during the war.
Some people argue that the early production units actually used glass elements taken from the Zeiss factory (although this has been debated). In any case, earlier production units of the Jupiter 9 actually tend to be superior to those produced later.
Unfortunately, the Jupiter 9 is a complicated lens prone to mechanical failure over time. Most old Jupiter 9 lenses (such as mine) have been disassembled by amateur repairmen and put back together. One of the common mistakes amateurs make when repairing the lens is the use of too much oil and reversing the aperture dial. My lens actually has both these problems ... but it still works.
Most of the later production run of the Jupiter 9 have flare and reflection problems. Luckily, using a simple lens hood largely eliminates these issues. The newer "MC" (multi-coated) Jupiter 9 lenses supposedly have better control over flare and reflection. However, quality control with the newer lenses has been spotty at best.
The worse examples of the Jupiter 9 are quite soft fully open at f/2, which isn't bad for portraiture. When stopped down to f/4 or f/5,6 the lens really becomes sharp. If you're lucky enough to get a good sample this lens can actually be quite good even when wide open.
Below is a photo taken with my Jupiter 9 at f/4.
 | |
