K5 destination or migration?
Posted 19/11/2011 - 10:11
Link
Not just me, lots of reviewers and that covers all marques as well. It's worth adding to the ohers i think, so hopefully you'll find it useful.
Best regards, John
Posted 19/11/2011 - 11:45
Link
I thought someone high up in Japan said that all Limited
lenses were designed for full frame or was it *DA primes?
lenses were designed for full frame or was it *DA primes?
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Posted 19/11/2011 - 13:02
Link
DrOrloff wrote:
For me the best Pentax primes are worth staying with Pentax for and if Pentax goes FF then acquire a FF body as well as a K5 and get the best of both worlds.
Perfect example on the gallery right now....For me the best Pentax primes are worth staying with Pentax for and if Pentax goes FF then acquire a FF body as well as a K5 and get the best of both worlds.
37747link
Why go anywhere else? Or take the lens with you if you do
Pentax pour des images riches en détails!
Posted 26/01/2012 - 13:14
Link
i'm afraid it's a migration for now. Hopefully Pentax will listen to it's customers.There has to be a progression up to its 645. Halting at K5 leaves too big a gap and it needs to compete with the big boys. It used to quite well once upon a time I am told.
fed up waiting for a FF
Posted 26/01/2012 - 20:21
Link
The power of advertising!
Learn to be happy with what you have, and make the best of what you've got. Otherwise, you'll spend your life "upgrading" to no effect other than to lighten your wallet.
G
Learn to be happy with what you have, and make the best of what you've got. Otherwise, you'll spend your life "upgrading" to no effect other than to lighten your wallet.
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 26/01/2012 - 21:36
Link
I agree with your sentiment G. That's why I'm not currently tempted to upgrade from my k7 to a k5. I can understand the move from apsc to full frame though, that's a more meaningful transition. A shame you can't do that and remain with Pentax, although by the end of the year who knows..
Posted 28/01/2012 - 11:45
Link
Frogfish wrote:
In what way does it 'out-perform' the 70 John ? Not according the the same PZ you referenced. In fact PZ actually give the 70 Ltd a higher optical quality rating (4 stars to 3.5 for the 77).
From PZ (both on the K10D as the 77 has not been tested on the K5) : -
77 : link
70 : link
Not in border resolution where there is a huge difference (the 70 pulverises the 77 until f5.6) and even in centre resolution the difference is only very small. Maybe in Pixie dust and build quality (though PZ rates them even there too) and I think both can actually be used on FF as well if I'm not mistaken ?
Of course MTF figures don't tell the whole story but I'd like to hear your reasoning - maybe from your own testing ?
The PF was pretty bad in my testing in shop of the 77 Ltd too (and one of the reasons I walked out without it the day before yesterday), occurring in virtually all shots I took - even though they were very high contrast and almost guaranteed to produce fringing.
Frogfish,
I humbly suggest that your approach to lens testing, whilst admirably rigorous, may sometimes lead you draw the wrong conclusions (assuming I have understood you correctly).In what way does it 'out-perform' the 70 John ? Not according the the same PZ you referenced. In fact PZ actually give the 70 Ltd a higher optical quality rating (4 stars to 3.5 for the 77).
From PZ (both on the K10D as the 77 has not been tested on the K5) : -
77 : link
70 : link
Not in border resolution where there is a huge difference (the 70 pulverises the 77 until f5.6) and even in centre resolution the difference is only very small. Maybe in Pixie dust and build quality (though PZ rates them even there too) and I think both can actually be used on FF as well if I'm not mistaken ?
Of course MTF figures don't tell the whole story but I'd like to hear your reasoning - maybe from your own testing ?
The PF was pretty bad in my testing in shop of the 77 Ltd too (and one of the reasons I walked out without it the day before yesterday), occurring in virtually all shots I took - even though they were very high contrast and almost guaranteed to produce fringing.
Frogfish,
The old motto: "Seek, and ye shall find" holds true in lens testing as in so much else. If the purpose of your testing is to find faults, then you will surely find them (for there is no such thing as perfection), but concentrating on the negative means that you are in danger of overlooking the positive. And in my view, it's the positives that make a good lens, not a lack of negatives.
In the case of the 77mm (and the other FA Ltds), you will certainly find purple fringing. You will also find that the AF is not quite as fast as more modern lenses. The MF is better of course.
But if instead of looking for what is bad, you concentrate on what is good, you will find that the 77mm, used in normal conditions, gives the most wonderful soft, creamy, skin tones. As a portrait lens (its raison d'etre) there is absolutely nothing better (though the FA 85mm and the new 55mm are no doubt in much the same league).
I never bother with formal tests. It's what the results look like that interests me. In terms of what is measurable, the FA Ltds are very sharp, reasonably fast, and generally free of distortion. But it's what you can't measure, but CAN see, that makes them so very special.
Yes, the 77mm has a couple of flaws. But good photographers who look at results rather than lens tests tend to agree that it is a very fine lens indeed.
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 28/01/2012 - 16:46
Link
George Lazarette wrote:
The old motto: "Seek, and ye shall find" holds true in lens testing as in so much else. If the purpose of your testing is to find faults, then you will surely find them (for there is no such thing as perfection), but concentrating on the negative means that you are in danger of overlooking the positive. And in my view, it's the positives that make a good lens, not a lack of negatives.
In the case of the 77mm (and the other FA Ltds), you will certainly find purple fringing. You will also find that the AF is not quite as fast as more modern lenses. The MF is better of course.
But if instead of looking for what is bad, you concentrate on what is good, you will find that the 77mm, used in normal conditions, gives the most wonderful soft, creamy, skin tones. As a portrait lens (its raison d'etre) there is absolutely nothing better (though the FA 85mm and the new 55mm are no doubt in much the same league).
I never bother with formal tests. It's what the results look like that interests me. In terms of what is measurable, the FA Ltds are very sharp, reasonably fast, and generally free of distortion. But it's what you can't measure, but CAN see, that makes them so very special.
Yes, the 77mm has a couple of flaws. But good photographers who look at results rather than lens tests tend to agree that it is a very fine lens indeed.
G
I can't disagree with you George. I eventually bought the 77 a month ago and can now hardly take it off my camera - I know now in what situations I have to be very careful and to avoid it's weaknesses and play to it's strengths.
Frogfish wrote:
In what way does it 'out-perform' the 70 John ? Not according the the same PZ you referenced. In fact PZ actually give the 70 Ltd a higher optical quality rating (4 stars to 3.5 for the 77).
From PZ (both on the K10D as the 77 has not been tested on the K5) : -
77 : link
70 : link
Not in border resolution where there is a huge difference (the 70 pulverises the 77 until f5.6) and even in centre resolution the difference is only very small. Maybe in Pixie dust and build quality (though PZ rates them even there too) and I think both can actually be used on FF as well if I'm not mistaken ?
Of course MTF figures don't tell the whole story but I'd like to hear your reasoning - maybe from your own testing ?
The PF was pretty bad in my testing in shop of the 77 Ltd too (and one of the reasons I walked out without it the day before yesterday), occurring in virtually all shots I took - even though they were very high contrast and almost guaranteed to produce fringing.
Frogfish,
I humbly suggest that your approach to lens testing, whilst admirably rigorous, may sometimes lead you draw the wrong conclusions (assuming I have understood you correctly).In what way does it 'out-perform' the 70 John ? Not according the the same PZ you referenced. In fact PZ actually give the 70 Ltd a higher optical quality rating (4 stars to 3.5 for the 77).
From PZ (both on the K10D as the 77 has not been tested on the K5) : -
77 : link
70 : link
Not in border resolution where there is a huge difference (the 70 pulverises the 77 until f5.6) and even in centre resolution the difference is only very small. Maybe in Pixie dust and build quality (though PZ rates them even there too) and I think both can actually be used on FF as well if I'm not mistaken ?
Of course MTF figures don't tell the whole story but I'd like to hear your reasoning - maybe from your own testing ?
The PF was pretty bad in my testing in shop of the 77 Ltd too (and one of the reasons I walked out without it the day before yesterday), occurring in virtually all shots I took - even though they were very high contrast and almost guaranteed to produce fringing.
Frogfish,
The old motto: "Seek, and ye shall find" holds true in lens testing as in so much else. If the purpose of your testing is to find faults, then you will surely find them (for there is no such thing as perfection), but concentrating on the negative means that you are in danger of overlooking the positive. And in my view, it's the positives that make a good lens, not a lack of negatives.
In the case of the 77mm (and the other FA Ltds), you will certainly find purple fringing. You will also find that the AF is not quite as fast as more modern lenses. The MF is better of course.
But if instead of looking for what is bad, you concentrate on what is good, you will find that the 77mm, used in normal conditions, gives the most wonderful soft, creamy, skin tones. As a portrait lens (its raison d'etre) there is absolutely nothing better (though the FA 85mm and the new 55mm are no doubt in much the same league).
I never bother with formal tests. It's what the results look like that interests me. In terms of what is measurable, the FA Ltds are very sharp, reasonably fast, and generally free of distortion. But it's what you can't measure, but CAN see, that makes them so very special.
Yes, the 77mm has a couple of flaws. But good photographers who look at results rather than lens tests tend to agree that it is a very fine lens indeed.
G
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0
Posted 28/01/2012 - 17:33
Link
The 77 seems to hit a real sweet spot in terms of size and speed. Hasky's shots in the gallery make great use of this lens and the rendering wide open is sublime. I can't justify buying one, but I'd be tempted by the 85/1.4 or the 70/2.4 and compromise on size (the Samyang) or speed (the DA70).
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
2087 posts
16 years
Shanghai
My own tests were done for ePHOTOzine (EPZ) and you'll find them there as well as on PU. Pentax User, not PZ....
My tests were done on the K-5 and quite recently.
There's little in it in terms of overall "quality" (aesthetic and subjective plus technical testing) and I really like the 70mm, but the resolution and technical performance of the original Limited lenses is higher.
I would happily use any of them, both the FA and DA Limited lenses.
I think there are still quite a few of us who don't realise that ePHOTOzine and Pentax User are sister sites with the same ownership. There are a mass of tests available "in house" at these two sites, without going to other internet sites. I get the feeling looking right here often gets overlooked. :
And you're right, I naturally go straight to the likes of PZ, SLRgear and DxO and forget all the hard work you have put in. I'll have to correct that in future.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0