Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 6, 2007, 2:45 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

danielchtong wrote:
Quote:
At this level of fine difference, the sharpness may not be that great an issue at all. The FA full frame one is impressive in showing its low light resolution.


That is an A* lens anyway and you are expected to use manual focus .

Daniel
What I could see, using a lens as a magnifying glass, is that the lens anyway has better resolution than the screen. So the picture should be sharper if printed on paper.

What's a bit frustrating with the A*85 is that I use it in dim light wide open, and then it's a bit tough to focus by naked eye without a split image screen. I have trusted the focus confirmation (green light/beep) and now I understand why there have been so many OOF pictures. I'll have to get a split image screen or learn to compensate for the frontfocusing.

Anyone has a comment on the Chinon lens?

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 2:10 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
I'll have to get a split image screen or learn to compensate for the frontfocusing.

Hi Kjell,

If you're interested in a split image focusing screen, I just got one of these for $30 USD shipped:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Split-Image-Focu...QQcmdZViewItem

He has diagonal split prisms also (or at least did when I ordered), so I got one of those, and really prefer it to the horizontal one. I also specified that I wanted one with an installation tab like on the OEM screen.

I replaced the Katzeye that I had in my DS with this one, and it seems to meter better (Spot metering had overexposed significantly). Also, the microprism ring is wider, tho the total focus aid area (split screen and microprism ring) is smaller than Mrs Katz's screens -- both sizes I like better than the Katz, in addition to it being significantly less expensive.

I didn't compare it directly with the OEM screen, but didn't notice any significant difference between its brightness and the Katz, and the Katz was definitely brighter than the OEM, in addition to having a finer texture to the Fresnel as does the Katz.

Delivery was prompt, considering it came regular mail and from China. Took under two weeks.

If you want the diagonal split screen and/or the installation tab, you have to e-mail him first to inquire if he has them, then when you order, specify these requests with the payment. He answered my inquiry about stock right away, but didn't notify me when he shipped, it just showed up.

I haven't used it much yet, but everything seems to be right so far. . .

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 3:14 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

Thanks for the info, I'll certainly consider this!

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 3:18 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
danielchtong wrote:
Quote:
At this level of fine difference, the sharpness may not be that great an issue at all. The FA full frame one is impressive in showing its low light resolution.


That is an A* lens anyway and you are expected to use manual focus .

Daniel
And again maybe something we will but heads on forever.... but NO.... the FA 50/1.4 doesent even come raelly close to what the old SMC A's do if you can get the MF right (the even in manual K AF confirmation helps with, and even in MF the FA failes at.)

But other than the convenience o f AF (which by in low light the FA 1.4 does REAL WELL at .... just NOT the edge to edge clarity of the old A's in my low light experience.... maybe in day light where why do you even need a 1.4???

And both are GOERGEOUS at near INF in low light... but NOT where DOF comes into play... where the FA really failes is in the shallow DOF (CENTER SHARP EDGES SO SO_ low light compared to the A 1.4/S.... and not for the DOF IN GOOD LIGHT (where again why a FAST lens) just that low light. consistancy of exposure edge to edge.The new glass fails.... untill maybe they come out with an ED or Limited. (OK the 43 is close.... but then again that loss of 7mm to INSURE so)
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 4:21 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

Hayward, since you have both the A and the FA, why don't you back up your statements with some sample pics taken under controlled conditions? My setup shouldn't be too complicated to repeat. (The table cloth really helps when checking if the focusing was correct, and also for inspecting centre/edge sharpness.)

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 8:22 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
Hayward, since you have both the A and the FA, why don't you back up your statements with some sample pics taken under controlled conditions? My setup shouldn't be too complicated to repeat. (The table cloth really helps when checking if the focusing was correct, and also for inspecting centre/edge sharpness.)

Kjell
I look forward to that as I have not had an A version at all. I am not surprised that it might (?) have an edge. Let us see.

Daniel, Toronto
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 8:43 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
What's a bit frustrating with the A*85 is that I use it in dim light wide open, and then it's a bit tough to focus by naked eye without a split image screen. I have trusted the focus confirmation (green light/beep) and now I understand why there have been so many OOF pictures. I'll have to get a split image screen or learn to compensate for the frontfocusing.

Kjell
I know and my A300mm has the same thing on my K100D. I do have a split focus screen on my DL. But I have trouble taking out the screen of K100D . A combination of split screen + S R is the best combination (for long lens) if only I can get one split screen on my K100D.
If you have trouble with A85mm 300mm would be even worse.

Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 8:45 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
Hayward, since you have both the A and the FA, why don't you back up your statements with some sample pics taken under controlled conditions? My setup shouldn't be too complicated to repeat. (The table cloth really helps when checking if the focusing was correct, and also for inspecting centre/edge sharpness.)

Kjell
Wel like I have said I do intend to..... but not something on the top of my daily chain of things TO DO.... because I KNOW but it seems I only HAVE to prove it to you (vs some othe rA owners that can do MF).... I didn't make this up situations... and again TOTTALY in the low light ideal ( end of things of COuRSE SINCE YOU HAVE I assume true Pentax SMCA's YOU COULD ALSO PROVE OTHER WISE if so bothered.) Lots of moderate do anything lenses/still P&S recorderds out there..

And like again (Other poster not you) what is the point of a fast lens in bright daylight even the cheapest a$$ lens will do pretty well at F/8 and above)?

Again it s MY OPINION, casual day to day use A vs FA..... you want to argue it on that level go ahead.....

Has to be one time only shot.... no question at all I'd take the A 1.4 over the FA 1.4 (even manual) ANY DAY.

Sorry but so far MY IMPRESSION is IF you can handle MF the old A's especially for cost vs the CONVIENIENCE of FA do a far bewtter job..... you have yet to takele that side....

Agaqin not that the 1.43 FA is a not a good enough lense.... just sort of half assed and no way even lives up to it last generation A history.

If a CRITICAL no retake possible situation i Would use my A 1.4 LONG before even thinking about the 1.4 FA..... especially in a the FA vs MF a wash situation.

FA 1.4 is a NICE lens FAR from HORRID.... but does not live up to its so far used lower cost history if you can handle MF (even f/2 or 1.7 I'd BOTH put over for over all FRa 1,4 IQ if not 1:1 exposure equivalance, AND NEED OF and SPEED AGAIN WHERE MF IS NOT A PROBLEM)

Naybe they will come out with a Limited 50mm version that will excell for big$$$..... but sorry but for the AF CONVENIENCE the FA 50 just doesn't approach the old A 1.4 (and with current K's even AF confitming (not always spot on) it just beng an A VS FA/DA... whatever.
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 9:26 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

ANd as I have long done.... having had all but the ExTREMLY rare 1.2 but all three seps of 50MM A's 2. 17, aqnd 1.4

And sorry again but for the AF conveniece even th A f/2 IMHO does a better than the FA 1.4 Subjective maybe.... but again if you can handle MF still half or les the cost.

Actually had to PROVE this to myself and bought a FA 50/1.4

Likely I will soon sell it the A 1.4 I will keep forever. again in that range especially with even MF 10D AF confermation..... I'take the A 50/1.4 ANYDAY.

Again hopefully will come up with a high grade 50mmm even if for $$$$ but at leat something that surpasses it predissesors non AF predescessor in IQ if not masybe moment (AF) of capture.

AGAIN MHO where the FA 50 has it PURELY AF.... but you can handle the MF the A's beat its A$$ in overall IQ


Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2007, 6:11 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

Hayward wrote:
Quote:
because I KNOW but it seems I only HAVE to prove it to you (vs some othe rA owners that can do MF)
Do I read that I can't do MF?

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=80

We have yet to see a good, sharp, well exposedpicture of any kind taken by you, with any lens. Edit: I extend that to "any lens on any camera".

This is a thread on FA 50mm 1.4 vs F 50mm 1.7.

Only one person (to make it clear, that person is you) keep coming back to thetopic A vs FA. You say A is far better than FA. No one has argued against that. Since you cling to that topic like it was the last tree top in New Orleans, some of us have just asked you to back up your statement with pictures.What's so f**** difficult about that?

Kjell


bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:33 AM.