Search results for 'back focus' - page 793
Pentax smc DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
I wonder how many photographers will buy a 55-60mm for portraits? I was tempted to buy one for that reason but ended up buying the DA*50-135 for the convenience before that I used the 40mm 100mm combo. Got one with the DA40 for you George does that count as well? Model: PENTAX K10D Shutter S...
Posted by Anvh on 11/07/2009 - 18:37
Pentax smc DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
Nice shot Stefan the eyes are nice and sharp and the ears out of focus which is good. It would improve it if the right side could be darkened, but if not it's still acceptable, very often happens with window light. The fact that you haven't used a telephoto gives the photo great depth. Makes you ...
Posted by shim on 11/07/2009 - 18:54
Pentax smc DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
Stefan, compare yours to this one which is a nice shot I found on Flickr taken with an 85mm (127mm on digital)..... far too flat..... makes you want to jump back away from the screen to look at it. Sometimes such as in fashion photography they actually want that effect even though it's not very in...
Posted by shim on 11/07/2009 - 19:28
Pentax smc DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
No crop or editing all with the K10D and DA40 I know the first one isn't sharp but oh well was a funny photo and too bad of the man in the background :( I'm only happy with the middle one to be honest. With the third one the focus is just a bit too much to the back since his left eye i...
Posted by Anvh on 11/07/2009 - 21:39
Pentax smc DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
In my view the perspective of the first and third give the impression that you are very close. Personally, I don't like that, though Shim seems to take the opposite view and that's fine. It's all a matter of taste. For that reason, I think that the middle one, where you are further back, has th...
Posted by George Lazarette on 11/07/2009 - 21:54
Your Most Exotic Lens
My most exotic "Pentax" lens, currently, would have to be the Takumar M42 S-M-C f/4 17mm Fisheye, which I acquired as a memento of a recent trip to Melbourne. My first film past this lens (using a venerable Asahi PentaxSV and a Minolta Spotmeter F) turned out really well (to my eyes) and tne sec...
Posted by Banjo on 07/07/2009 - 03:27
Your Most Exotic Lens
Other than that I'd quite like to see a DA135/3.5 in the style of my Sonnar, but Pentax covers pretty much all the bases I'm likely to want or need so I'm contented. :) What's wrong with the F or FA 135mm? G Too big, too heavy, results similar to slightly longer versions of my D-FA100 whereas the...
Posted by hefty1 on 07/07/2009 - 15:35
Your Most Exotic Lens
I've had five of them now and the one I've ended up keeping (purely because it was in the best condition) dates from 1984. As for not putting them in the same category as Western Zeiss I'd agree - by and large the Eastern lenses are far superior! Up until the end of WWII *all* Zeiss lenses came f...
Posted by hefty1 on 07/07/2009 - 16:20
Your Most Exotic Lens
As far as I know Hasselblads have always used glass from Jena - the lens bodies may have been assembled in the West but I'm not 100% sure whereabouts (Zeiss have had almost as many assembly plants as they've had changes of name). :? Even on larger formats though you never see Planars above 100mm ...
Posted by hefty1 on 07/07/2009 - 16:33
135mm f1:2.5 K lens
I was in my local camera shop yesterday for the first time ever and they had a selection of old lenses including a Pentax 135mm f1:2.5 k mount manual lens. Are these any good and is the £20 asking price probably worth it? I left a fiver on it and am going back to try it out but as I really don...
Posted by andyvarney on 07/07/2009 - 08:42
135mm f1:2.5 K lens
I was in my local camera shop yesterday for the first time ever and they had a selection of old lenses including a Pentax 135mm f1:2.5 k mount manual lens. Are these any good and is the £20 asking price probably worth it? I left a fiver on it and am going back to try it out but as I really don...
Posted by smc on 07/07/2009 - 12:41
Are 'fast' lenses less important with modern DSLRs?
Like all things, you match the compromises to suit the situation. If I can't use a tripod for a low light shot, then without hesitation I up the ISO. A sharp noisy picture would be better than an unsharp one IMHO. I have an f1.4 lens, but the downside is that if you use it as such then you hav...
Posted by BODYHEAT on 08/07/2009 - 11:33
Are 'fast' lenses less important with modern DSLRs?
So my question is really this. Do we need to pay a premium for fast lenses if this feature will become less significant as all other aspects of DSLR design improve and supersede them? Yes, if you still want depth of field control. No, if you don't. That seems to be the simple answer.:D Well, I...
Posted by BODYHEAT on 08/07/2009 - 14:15
Are 'fast' lenses less important with modern DSLRs?
Photoshop includes a proper "Lens Blur" filter - but effective use of it requires creating an accurate focus depth map first. I've used it many times - it's very effective indeed, but it can be very time consuming :roll: Matt
Posted by MattMatic on 08/07/2009 - 15:26
Are 'fast' lenses less important with modern DSLRs?
I downloaded a program which I can't find at the moment and you could take 5 shots at different focus points and blend them to give a full DOF, I'll keep looking. Jack.
Posted by jackitec on 08/07/2009 - 22:39
Are 'fast' lenses less important with modern DSLRs?
One point which has been missed... it is also an extra stop into your EYES making seeing what you are photographing easier. Also, AF systems tend to like more light too, although they are improving all the time too. An excellent point womble. Also, anyone who uses a split prism focus screen wil...
Posted by pschlute on 09/07/2009 - 10:17
Pentax-M SMC 28mm 2.8
Well its true I got a 17-70 Sigma but I don't like it when I take landscape pics, it's not sharp enough. (I don't have the kit lens, I bought the Sigma instead) I don't know if this is better, but from the pics I've seen it take it surely looks like it. Will probably get it just before I leav...
Posted by Draken on 08/07/2009 - 13:20
Is the Da 50-200mm zoom lens any good?
Hi fello pentaxian's. I am thinking about selling my old sigma 18-200mm aspherical lense and going for something slightly better in optical quality. With my K10 i have used it on some rare occasions, as i rarely use zoom, but have found that for some odd reason, the contrast is low and focus is not ...
Posted by mattox on 08/07/2009 - 11:25
Is the Da 50-200mm zoom lens any good?
Thanks guys. Sounds like i have been convinced. But one thing, what is the focus speed like? One thing that has always knocked me down is the speed. Ofcourse my SDM 16-50mm does well, but the kit lense and my trusty old FA 35mm are a bit on the slow side. Sometimes you really miss that candid moment...
Posted by mattox on 09/07/2009 - 19:06
Is the Da 50-200mm zoom lens any good?
I wouldn`t get too hung up about focus speed. There are many variables that will affect it. Keep practicing will help capture that moment. it always amazes me how much we see developing in front of the camera as we are using it. personally I don`t find the DA 300 any different on the focus time. Pro...
Posted by cedricd on 09/07/2009 - 19:56
