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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 19, 2007, 7:39 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
nhmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Posts: 5,202
Default

I've been reading a lot of this weekend and understanding a little bit more. (Mind you, just a little. There's a lot more to this than I initially thought. :-))

Roy had said if I find something interesting to just ask about it. So, does anyone know anything about the above lens? I'm still trying to figure out if I want 50mm, 100mm or 135mm. Or, as Harriet stated, she's happy with her 70-300. I can see the advantages to each. I know I've heard many people talk about their Sears lenses around here and didn't know if these was one of those recommended ones.

Any thoughts?

Thanks, Patty
nhmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 19, 2007, 9:06 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
robar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: D/FW area Texas
Posts: 7,590
Default

i had a longer post to this but the forum ate it. the shots i've from most coated135s have been good no matter the brand. not sure if i'd give much more than 20usd delivered for it..

roy
robar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2007, 9:47 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,724
Default

It's a very useful length, and very common, regardless of the brand. As Roy has said, don't pay a lot because they can be bought very cheaply just about every day on our favorite auction site.

I took a lot of good pictures with mine before I replaced it with a 135mm, f2.5.
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2007, 10:30 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

Trojansoc wrote:
Quote:
It's a very useful length, and very common, regardless of the brand. As Roy has said, don't pay a lot because they can be bought very cheaply just about every day on our favorite auction site.

I took a lot of good pictures with mine before I replaced it with a 135mm, f2.5.
What they said. I've found the 50mm to be a bit more versatile but the 135mm is a good one too. You just have to get more distance between the subject and you with the 135mm lens. The 50mm works better indoors and in crowds like family get togethers.

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2007, 9:03 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
nhmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Posts: 5,202
Default

Thank you for the input. This was found on our favorite auction site. Starting at $0.99. That's why it caught my attention.

A question I'll probably find the answer in what all I'm reading, but while I'm thinking about it - bigdawg, you said a 50mm is more versatile like for indoor crowds. I wouldn't think I'd want a macro lens for a crowd??? Or, is there not a difference between regular 50mm and macro 50mm (or any size for that matter). I've been assuming a macro will let me get closer to my subject. Whereas a regular wouldn't.

Thanks, Patty
nhmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2007, 10:49 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

You suppose correctly - macro lenses allow for focusing closer to a subject than you would get with a non-macro lens. Make sure that the 135mm lens says macro and then (if you can) look up it's characteristics. My Kiron 80-200 lens says it's a macro and does focus closer than many lenses but it will only do 1:4, not 1:1.

As a clarification, I don't actually have the 70-300 macrolens - just seen lots of good pictures taken with it. I have the Vivitar Series One 105mm macro (one of Trader Jim's).
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2007, 11:58 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

nhmom wrote:
Quote:
a 50mm is more versatile like for indoor crowds. I wouldn't think I'd want a macro lens for a crowd??? Or, is there not a difference between regular 50mm and macro 50mm (or any size for that matter). I've been assuming a macro will let me get closer to my subject. Whereas a regular wouldn't.
Hi Patty,

The difference between a prime macro lens and a standard prime is that the macro lens will focus continuously from infinity to it's minimum focusing distance which will give either 1:1 or 1:2 reproduction ratios, depending on the lenses spec, and subject distances will be a matter of inches away from the front of the lens (where a standard lens will usually only focus to within a couple of feet). Because it will also focus to infinity, it can also be used as any other lens of the same focal length and will give you the same field of view. AF performance also suffers because of the wide range of focusing distances (might give you a lot of very slow hunting), so keep that in mind if you're thinking about a dedicated macro for use as a standard prime.

The shorter focal lengths give you shorter working distances for maximum magnification shots, and usually have a flatter field of focus (more consistantly sharp from corner to corner) in addition to having greater DOF for a given aperture, so, for example, a 50mm dedicated macro will probably be better for document copying, but for critters, you'd have to be so close to get 1:1 that you'd probably scare them away (or be scared yourself, being so close :-)), so a macro lens of about 100mm is favored by most for the addition working distance.

Just for discussion sake, the Pentax A*200 and FA*200 Macros are considered among the "holy grail" class lenses, regardless of manufaturer, and are, in addition to being very rare and very expensive (like $2000+ USD used), are also big and very heavy, so even if one might feel the need for the best, it's not necessarily very convenient or easy to use.

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2007, 7:41 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
nhmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Posts: 5,202
Default

Thanks,Harriet and Scott. Yes, I see now that it was actually the 300 that you had, Harriet. My mind is on overload with all I've been reading. I'm reading on my lunch hours every day and falling asleep at night reading all the pages everyone sent me to. I'm also involved with getting our new software at work ready to use. So, my head is ready to explode. There aren't enough hours in a day!

Well, the price of the 200mm is way out of my range! Explains why I hadn't seen anything that size. My husband is trying to talk me into a 28mm macro. Says I shouldn't need anything more.......I'm listening to you guys. I think something in the 50-130 range is more what I need.

Thanks for the input. I'll keep reading and looking at what's out there.

Patty




nhmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2007, 8:22 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
jachol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NW. England
Posts: 1,201
Default

Hi Patty,
There's the Cosina(has other names too) 100mm f3.5 Macro lens does 1:2 as it stands and 1:1 with a supplied front add-on lens. It's plastic bodied so that lowers the price, but it's a very sharp and excellent macro lens, and would double as a portrait lens, It goes for around £50 sometimes less in the UK, so around 100 USD I'd guess. Some sample shots of results I've had with mine in this thread ... Jack.

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...121&forum_id=7
jachol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2007, 9:33 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

jachol wrote:
Quote:
Hi Patty,
There's the Cosina(has other names too) 100mm f3.5 Macro lens does 1:2 as it stands and 1:1 with a supplied front add-on lens. It's plastic bodied so that lowers the price, but it's a very sharp and excellent macro lens, and would double as a portrait lens, It goes for around £50 sometimes less in the UK, so around 100 USD I'd guess. Some sample shots of results I've had with mine in this thread ... Jack.

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...amp;forum_id=7
The 50mm f/2 I have is not a macro lens but being a shorter focal length than a 135mm lens it will focus up closer and give you a wider field of view. With a 135mm lens you would have to stand 10 feet or more away from your subject to get a good photo...With a 50mm you can stand much closer and get someone's face in focus and fill the frame. 99 cents for a used 135mm is a great price and would be well worth the small cost. I've gotten them for the same price plus shipping many times.

Dawg

bigdawg 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 1:30 AM.