Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 13, 2009, 11:46 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

For anyone interested here is a quick shot (it is -10F here today) from the backyard using my 300mm lens from my Pentax 645, adapted to my K20D. There is information going around that MF lenses are too soft to use on a DSLR and I am here to say that is not true.

Hand held, 1/500sec @ f/4, ISO 400


Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 13, 2009, 12:10 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Central Vermont
Posts: 1,890
Default

Nice pic, and nice details in the feathers. I wish I had some old Pentax lenses to use on my DSLR, but my film-era SLR was an Olympus OM-1.

By the way, your sub-zero weather is heading our direction. It's supposed to drop below zero tonight and stay that way for several days. They're calling for -25 degrees on Thursday night. Time to stoke up the wood stove!
mtnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 12:18 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

I had some OM cameras also and they were extremely nice SLR's.

The cold (thanks Canada) is going to be here for about four days also which makes travel dangerous, so I guess staying home is in the cards until the weekend.

I actually still use the 645n a bit, although I have neglected the 67 for quite a while and should take it out if the weather gets better since the results are just amazing.

I still like film although I am using digital most of the time now!

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 1:54 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 373
Default

How is the performance wide open with the MF Pentax lenses? Since the DOF is so narrow on MF, I would assume they were not used much wide-open.

From time to time I get the itch of buying a 645N and some FA lenses with the prices so low. But then I realize how much high-end slide scanning costs and I drop the idea...
DigitalAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 2:03 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Goldwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 6,515
Default

Beautiful Shot Tom.
yeah, that cold is supposed to make its way down here tonight through Sat. might even drop below 40
. :blah:
GW:bye:
Goldwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 2:14 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 373
Default

Goldwinger wrote:
Quote:
Beautiful Shot Tom.
yeah, that cold is supposed to make its way down here tonight through Sat. might even drop below 40
. :blah:
GW:bye:
We got -22F this morning with a windchill of -44F. It is sunny thou with clear sky and great visibility. I went to work with the ski mask on but it did not help much. Not happy.
DigitalAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 4:33 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

f/4 is wide open with this lens and to be honest I don't see that much difference in DOF between this lens and my normal f/4.5 lens, at least on the K20D.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 4:49 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

I was just looking at this lens on ebay and felt a bit tempted (no, I don't have the money now anyway). Would you say it's a worthy alternative to a A*/F*/FA*/DA* 300 mm, or is it just OK if you happen to already have one in the closet? I'm not thinking IQ now, but handling.

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 5:41 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

Well handling wise it is a bit longer than the FA*300 and a a bit heavier, but today I shot everything hand held without any problems.

Now my lens is the A* 300, so it does have EDIF glass and you have to remember all the 645 lenses are completely manual since the connverter doesn't have any contacts in it. The glass in 645 lenses is extremely good, although there are some that are not so good like my 45mm 2.8, which is too soft for my taste.

If you are goiing to use the lens for a DSLR then there is no sense paying the extra cash for the FA*300 645 lens, since I have used both and can see no difference in IQ between the two and it won't AF anyway.

WOW, I just looked on ebay and these lenses have jumped in price an amazing amount in the last year, at least four time what I paid for mine.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 6:05 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
kazuya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,007
Default

tack sharp
kazuya 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 12:20 PM.