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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 1, 2008, 10:39 AM   #11
TDN
Senior Member
 
TDN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,288
Default

thkn777 wrote:
Quote:
to my mind you either were lucky in getting a high quality lense or the people saying that those lenses wide open are blurry/smooth (which wouldn't be such a problem)/have low resolution just ask for way too much.
Yep, that's exactly it.

When you read reviews of lenses like this (non-DG) you'll read comments about how it's "too soft wide open" or "not contrasty enough", "too much flare" etc etc.

Although some might hold truth, most of the reaction like that are because those reviewers assume that the lens is going to do everything for them

With fast lenses like this, the focus has to be spot on. And in low light situations, I trust my eye over AF...

Sure, with new special coated lenses that go up to 500 or 1000 bucks a piece it might be easier. But my wallet likes it the cheaper way


Happy lens-hunting!

Tom


TDN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 6:58 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

@TDN
Thanks

I found some offers for a Vivitar 28-105 2.8-3.8 lense where reviews said pictures were tack-sharp (at least for one series of that lense: 67mm, rubber grip, 14/12 construction)

Will have a look at what price those lenses go for and maybe include in my list, as common Tamron or Sigma 2.8 lenses sell on ebay for shop prices atm - even if they are used

Last weekend I used the standard Pentax lense indoors because of the 18mm wide at f=3.5 - but again the photos I took proved that I need something faster. Interior was ok, but people moved way too fast in available light situations, and too much flashlight just isn't welcome - hard enough to to not make people angry at you when you snap away without it :roll:

(You know this, I am sure - they all want nice photos of the family and the kids and stuff but they don't want photographs of themselfes... "I always look ugly!" and so on - even if you was able to catch them in typical scenes or got a typical facial expression)

I just can't use flash there...

thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 8:35 AM   #13
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
ast weekend I used the standard Pentax lense indoors because of the 18mm wide at f=3.5 - but again the photos I took proved that I need something faster.
Assuming you've already increased your ISO speed to the highest tolerable level, and you found f/3.5 was not giving you fast enough shutter speeds, you probably need to look at a different prime if you're finding 50mm doesn't give you room enough for the desired composition.

Another 1/2 stop using a lens with f/2.8 available isn't going to help much if your shutter speeds were still too slow at f/3.5 on the wide end of your kit lens and you can't use a flash.

You may want to consider something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC AF lens. It's selling for around $429 at vendors here. Note that this is a "digital only" lens. So, if you moved to a body with a larger sensor later (assuming Pentax goes down that path), it's not going to work on it (at least not without vignetting).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 9:15 AM   #14
TDN
Senior Member
 
TDN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,288
Default

thkn777 wrote:
Quote:
Last weekend I used the standard Pentax lense indoors because of the 18mm wide at f=3.5 - but again the photos I took proved that I need something faster. Interior was ok, but people moved way too fast in available light situations, and too much flashlight just isn't welcome - hard enough to to not make people angry at you when you snap away without it :roll:

(You know this, I am sure - they all want nice photos of the family and the kids and stuff but they don't want photographs of themselfes... "I always look ugly!" and so on - even if you was able to catch them in typical scenes or got a typical facial expression)

I just can't use flash there...
Take a look at this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ACDqBd59F54
(the previous videos are at www.abetterbouncecard.com )
Flash without hurting people's eyes

Tom
TDN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 9:57 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mornington, Australia
Posts: 697
Default

Hi thkn777,
I've posted some walkers using my 28-70 ex sigma, all resizes & jpeged only.
Simon
simowills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2008, 6:14 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

@Simowills
The shot under the bridge is nice Thanks for posting!

@JimC
Yes - I tend to forget about that even when I know this from taking photos. I am using my A 50/1.7 mostly around 2.0 when it's darker and try to stop down for better DOF now and then... so I was hoping a 2.8 lens that can do sharp shots would be enough... but it won't give me the fast feeling of my 1.7 lense - you are right.

I was looking for a 24/28..60/70 lens also due to the fact that I have a fast 50mm when I really need the speed and can continue the 28-70 range with my Vivitar 70-210/2.8-3.5 on the long end. So I could carry two zooms and a prime...

Other idea was to go for the 17-70/2.8-4.5 Sigma lense, not that big problem with thr 4.5 on the tele end, can switch to the Vivitar if neccessary.

But again... it won't be really fast, but a very very nice walkaround lense I reckon.

Sigma 28/1.8 Macro (260 EUR) or 30/1.4 (360 EUR) really might be the way to go... but I have to save for that.

Thanks.

thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2008, 2:46 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

thkn777 wrote:
Quote:
Sigma 28/1.8 Macro (260 EUR) or 30/1.4 (360 EUR) really might be the way to go...
Before I bought my FA35mm 2.0, I considered the Sigma 30mm 1.4. But the reviews I found were not very enthusiastic. I'm very enthusiastic about the FA35mm. Check it at wide open in this thread (and compare it to a few other Pentax primes):

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...=80&page=2

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2008, 5:09 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

Ah, thanks! I will have a closer look at those pictures later.

Now while I don't have a series of shots ready I can show you a detail of the photo I am working on at the moment. On the left side you see a crop, which is sized to 50%, otherwise untouched. On the right side a very basic attempt to sharpen and bring out details, just to play with it and to see what's in there. Taken with my Vivitar 70-210/2.8-3.5 at 70mm/2.8 (ISO 800, 1/100s) - if I get those results wide open and only with the available light I usually feel ok about it.



Th.
thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2008, 5:52 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

This clearly shows the benefit of pp-ing. I never understood why to be proud of "no pp, right out of camera".

Except when comparing lenses side by side. But then it's not the picture as such but the comparison that is interesting.

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2008, 6:09 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

bilybianca wrote:
Quote:
This clearly shows the benefit of pp-ing. I never understood why to be proud of "no pp, right out of camera".

Except when comparing lenses side by side. But then it's not the picture as such but the comparison that is interesting.

Kjell

Well - for me postprocessing is just a way to overcome certain limitations of in-camera software, the camera/lense combo and mistakes I made :roll:

So when there is detail in a photo I would have seen it with my eyes also. If the lense captured it as in the above example and I can correct the little blurring and the hazy/flat feeling that the Vivitar gives me for whatever reason, I'll do that. I won't add things that aren't there.

But we lost track. I only wanted to show what I am after when I look for a sharp lense. I consider the Vivitar to be decent in the means of sharpness/detail wide open. A tad better would be nice but a similar result with an affordable2.0/1.8/1.4 lense wide open and I'd be happy.

Th.


P.S. As for being proud of "no pp - right out of camera" - for me it's ease of use.Take a pic, print a pic, give it to someone. Done. The normal family/everyday "take a photo!!!" situation is where I like it when my camera gives me a usable set of pictures, ready to print on my inkjet and make someone in the family happy with it. It feels good when I can trust my camera in those situations. Nothing wrong with that!
thkn777 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 7:08 AM.