Search results for 'back focus' - page 1087
need some advice on wide angle lens
In terms of price - this seller originally tried to sell this lens for £400 and failed. There is another on ebay for £323 - which has also failed to sell previously. However - the last few to sell on ebay have sold for £313, £433 and £290. OK - so now the lens itself. In it's day - one o...
Posted by fritzthedog on 09/05/2013 - 07:27
focusing issues with 55-300
starting up an old topic to be more specific. After a recent holiday in Patagonia all wildlife shots out of focus due to issues with new 55-300 lens. I downloaded a focusing chart to see if it was a back or front focusing issue but still cant find a clear answer. From the chart the results seem soft...
Posted by mattox on 10/05/2013 - 16:13
Starting from Scratch with Lenses
I mainly shoot indoor sports. The 60-250 is an outstanding lens, but not the best choice when it comes to sport. It is super sharp, but with a rather long focus through and a rather slow SDM focusing motor, the combination makes it too slow to focus for most sport. Beside, for indoor sport, a len...
Posted by pentaxian450 on 11/05/2013 - 15:52
Starting from Scratch with Lenses
Hi Ferret. I have just dropped all my Canon full frame cameras and lenses. The 50-135 2.8 is a great lens that works perfectly at 2.8 and is sharp. Focus isn't as fast as a Canon but not by a huge amount. Can't say anything about the 60-250 as I don't have it. I would rather have two lenses...
Posted by MartinEA on 11/05/2013 - 18:15
Starting from Scratch with Lenses
Hello, there's a bit range difference in these two setups, I notice in your first post you're shooting portrait and indoor sports, so I can't really see where the sigma 150-500 has come into the equation, because this lens is not designed for these type of shots, it's huge for a portrait lens and fo...
Posted by CIBarker on 23/05/2013 - 21:47
portrait lenses?
Hi Deryn, Portrait lenses traditionally have been around 85-105mm with wide apertures to allow minimum depth of field. These are now generally expensive - the cheapest new is probably the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 manual focus (about £230). A 28-80 zoom is typically going to be f/4 or f/5.6 ish at th...
Posted by johnha on 14/05/2013 - 21:47
portrait lenses?
Hi all, I am checking out all considerations. Cost is a consideration as Chris says, so an older lens will be my focus. Not many 35-105's about. Lot's of 135's, but so many manufacturers! Some of the other lenses are too expensive. I'm not bothered using it with my K10. I'm looking for a ce...
Posted by DERYN on 14/05/2013 - 22:28
portrait lenses?
It is, however, sometimes fine to use almost any lens for creative portraiture. A 500mm mirror lens can give some interesting results, but not all the time, just to explore new territory. .....another step back ..... and another ..... a couple more ... nearly there ..... and another .... yep I've go...
Posted by dougf8 on 15/05/2013 - 09:55
portrait lenses?
I used a Tamron Adaptall 105 f2.5 in my film days (Canon AE-1 I'm afraid) I still use this from time to tie on my Pentax DSLRs too. Nice light weight lens, sharp too but with nice bokeh. You can use it with a KA or plain K adaptor (the KA ones seem to go fo £50+ just for the adaptor!) I found 90- 10...
Posted by StephenHampshire on 15/05/2013 - 22:15
portrait lenses?
Hi, that seems a good price for the 135 in good condition. My only reservation would be the minimum focus distance of just over 1 metre. As I would want the lens mainly for portraits I just feel this could be a bit difficult to always accommodate, especially indoors. Or would that distance be an adv...
Posted by DERYN on 15/05/2013 - 23:05
portrait lenses?
Yes, the 1 metre thing isn't a problem at all. Full-length shots need a full living room's distance. Nice outside. But it's as sharp as a tack, so great wide open and when you're finished with it, just sell it for the same price :) Actually, I've just had a thought. I'm loving manual focus on the K...
Posted by Darkmunk on 16/05/2013 - 13:56
180 or 200 mm macro lenses
I've been a Pentax user for more years than I care to remember, but I'm really disappointed that there is no replacement for the manual focus 200 mm macro lens, either from Pentax or Sigma. The longer focal length lens offers the photographer so much with regards to wildlife photography. Not only ...
Posted by hawfinch2 on 16/05/2013 - 09:23
180 or 200 mm macro lenses
Fair enough, although I presume you were using film originally? If that's the case, you actually need a 135mm macro lens now to give the same field of view that you used to have. The 100mm macro comes close, giving an equivalent to 150mm on film. However, I find that the 55-300mm lens actually co...
Posted by johnriley on 16/05/2013 - 10:13
180 or 200 mm macro lenses
Just one question, OP. How come you have survived this long without a 200mm? Or have you only recently come to macro photography? If so, you will find that many people prefer manual focus over AF, and there are a variety of MF lenses around 180-200 in K-mount. G
Posted by George Lazarette on 16/05/2013 - 15:31
180 or 200 mm macro lenses
I find the 10- 135mm DA WR better than the 55-300mm for 'close up' due to its constant 40cm min focus distance. I like to use old 50mm manual lenses with extension tubes for the really close stuff.
Posted by wvbarnes on 16/05/2013 - 20:35
Sigma 24mm f2.8 Vs Pentax 21mm f3.2
Decided to go with the 21mm f3.2, so now selling the sigma in classifieds:(:(:( I can see a rookie mistake going on here Mate, you inform the good lady that you have located a sigma "that's better than" the pentax ltd. Its a private cash only sale. You then produce the sigma after "going to pick it ...
Posted by bettyswolloks on 18/05/2013 - 14:16
Sigma 24mm f2.8 Vs Pentax 21mm f3.2
Decided to go with the 21mm f3.2, so now selling the sigma in classifieds:(:(:( I can see a rookie mistake going on here Mate, you inform the good lady that you have located a sigma "that's better than" the pentax ltd. Its a private cash only sale. You then produce the sigma after "going to pick it ...
Posted by MattyH on 18/05/2013 - 14:27
SMC A50mm f1.2 vs FA 43mm f1.9 limited
I have both, and see them as complementary rather than competing. The 50 is remarkable for its depth of field, which even on digital is extraordinary. It gives a lovely creamy look to skin as it goes out of focus, not unlike the legendary 77mm. Otherwise it is just another Pentax 50mm, so if you ...
Posted by George Lazarette on 16/05/2013 - 15:19
SMC A50mm f1.2 vs FA 43mm f1.9 limited
Tks! Not Hongkong though, it was in Lucca, Tuscany on my honeymoon a few years back :)
Posted by robbiec on 17/05/2013 - 09:58
SMC A50mm f1.2 vs FA 43mm f1.9 limited
Thanks Robbie for sharing your experience with these lenses! I have already plunged into a purchase of a SMC A50mm f1.2:D:D But I hope someday I will be able to add a FA43 to my collection. Your suggestion about selling the M50 f1.4 makes sense, I will try to sell it here in Norway together with...
Posted by robbiec on 17/05/2013 - 10:26
