43mm Ltd
Posted 02/03/2010 - 19:10
Link
You just can't trust these cheap optics. Can I have second refusal if it's got to go?
A.
A.
Best wishes,
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Posted 02/03/2010 - 19:23
Link
It is actually normal for lenses to behave differently (in terms of front/back focus) under tungsten lighting compared to daylight or flourescent light. Often you won't spot the change as the depth-of-field is sufficient to mask small discrepancies, however, when you use a lens with a very wide aperture then obviously critical focussing is more, er, critical. I tend to stick to manual focus under tungsten, especially with my 43 and 77.
Apologies to those respondees hoping to pick up a bargain - I promise not to answer any more questions for at least a week...
Apologies to those respondees hoping to pick up a bargain - I promise not to answer any more questions for at least a week...
Joining the Q
Posted 02/03/2010 - 19:37
Link
Thanks hefty, you're right in that it's only noticeable at f1.9. You've allayed my fears that I had a dud. It' such a great lens that excentricities like this I can certainly live with.
I was very close then to sticking it in the classifieds for £50 or so . Sorry guys...
I was very close then to sticking it in the classifieds for £50 or so . Sorry guys...
Posted 02/03/2010 - 19:48
Link
Oh Shucks!
Hefty had to go and spoil our fun. I do so hate voices of reason, don't you davex?
A.
Hefty had to go and spoil our fun. I do so hate voices of reason, don't you davex?
A.
Best wishes,
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Posted 02/03/2010 - 20:59
Link
I see exactly the same with my FA 50mm (on a K20D). Focus is fine in daylight, but needs -10 indoors for tungsten. It's a pain.
Posted 03/03/2010 - 20:15
Link
andymcm wrote:
I see exactly the same with my FA 50mm (on a K20D). Focus is fine in daylight, but needs -10 indoors for tungsten. It's a pain.
Thanks for that Andy - it has put my mind at rest.I see exactly the same with my FA 50mm (on a K20D). Focus is fine in daylight, but needs -10 indoors for tungsten. It's a pain.
I have just bought an FA50 1.4 and it is very different to the longer slower lenses I am used to.
I was beginning to wonder if I had a duff one.
Posted 03/03/2010 - 21:16
Link
hefty1 wrote:
It is actually normal for lenses to behave differently (in terms of front/back focus) under tungsten lighting compared to daylight or flourescent light. Often you won't spot the change as the depth-of-field is sufficient to mask small discrepancies, however, when you use a lens with a very wide aperture then obviously critical focussing is more, er, critical. I tend to stick to manual focus under tungsten, especially with my 43 and 77.
Apologies to those respondees hoping to pick up a bargain - I promise not to answer any more questions for at least a week...
The K7 has a special sensor that reads the colour of the light and adapts the focus, so it should preform the same under all light sources.It is actually normal for lenses to behave differently (in terms of front/back focus) under tungsten lighting compared to daylight or flourescent light. Often you won't spot the change as the depth-of-field is sufficient to mask small discrepancies, however, when you use a lens with a very wide aperture then obviously critical focussing is more, er, critical. I tend to stick to manual focus under tungsten, especially with my 43 and 77.
Apologies to those respondees hoping to pick up a bargain - I promise not to answer any more questions for at least a week...
You now have a reason to update your camera
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
73 posts
17 years
Herts,
UK
My question is - is this normal or not. Not that I can take it back or anything nor would I want to, i'm just curious. I just need to remember to adjust the AF settings.
Any thoughts....?
Mike