Samsung D-Xenon 50-200 4/5.6
3,062 posts
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 11:51
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
~Pete
~Pete
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 11:52
iceblinker wrote:
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
I have read some where its similar to the WR version of Pentax am i right in saying so ???
Camera: *ist DS,MZ-50,
Lenses: D-Xenon 50-200mm 4/5.6, pentax smc a 50mm 1.7, Kiron 70-210mm, Pentax SMC DAL 18-55, Asahi 2x Rear tele-converter, Sirius M42 135mm macro, M42 extension tubes 61mm,
Flash: Jessops 360 AFdc
MY WEBSITE
Last Edited by shanegeach on 26/02/2010 - 11:54
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 11:57
shanegeach wrote:
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
I have read some where its similar to the WR version of Pentax am i right in saying so ???
iceblinker wrote:
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
I have read some where its similar to the WR version of Pentax am i right in saying so ???
Like the WR version without the weather proofing. So pretty much the standard Pentax 50-200.
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 12:34
shanegeach wrote:
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
It's not quite the same, but yes tweaking afterwards usually does the trick.
~Pete
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 13:20
robbie_d wrote:
Like the WR version without the weather proofing. So pretty much the standard Pentax 50-200.
shanegeach wrote:
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
I have read some where its similar to the WR version of Pentax am i right in saying so ???
Quote:
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
I have read some where its similar to the WR version of Pentax am i right in saying so ???
Like the WR version without the weather proofing. So pretty much the standard Pentax 50-200.
Coatings are different though, at least for sure on the WR.
It's unknown what the Samsung less has or if it's the same as with the non WR pentax.
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Helpful 
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 16:06
It's a great looking lens, Shane. I think having 50mm (rather than 70mm)at the short end will add considerably to its usefulness, particularly in the studio. That's like an "old" 75mm portrait length.
Keep well.
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
Helpful
Keep well.
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
Helpful
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 16:39
Anvh wrote:
Coatings are different though, at least for sure on the WR.
It's unknown what the Samsung less has or if it's the same as with the non WR pentax.
robbie_d wrote:
Like the WR version without the weather proofing. So pretty much the standard Pentax 50-200.
Quote:
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
I have read some where its similar to the WR version of Pentax am i right in saying so ???
iceblinker wrote:
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
Very good for the size. Bit low in contrast, otherwise not bad. It's virtually the same as the Pentax version.
if its low in contrast then i could tweak it afterwards right ???
I have read some where its similar to the WR version of Pentax am i right in saying so ???
Like the WR version without the weather proofing. So pretty much the standard Pentax 50-200.
Coatings are different though, at least for sure on the WR.
It's unknown what the Samsung less has or if it's the same as with the non WR pentax.
Which is what I said
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Link
Posted 26/02/2010 - 20:07
I got one of these as well, I quite like it for what I use it for. I will be selling it soon to help towards my 55-300mm lens. 
Colin
“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.”
Edmund Burke (1729 – 1797)
Colin
“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.”
Edmund Burke (1729 – 1797)
Link
Posted 27/02/2010 - 22:46
hey all, just to let you know i got the lens this morning and gonna give it some good testing tomorrow when im out and about and upload them in this forum.... came with a hood as well and its really in mint condition as in the picture at the top...... not bad for £66.50 huh ????
Camera: *ist DS,MZ-50,
Lenses: D-Xenon 50-200mm 4/5.6, pentax smc a 50mm 1.7, Kiron 70-210mm, Pentax SMC DAL 18-55, Asahi 2x Rear tele-converter, Sirius M42 135mm macro, M42 extension tubes 61mm,
Flash: Jessops 360 AFdc
MY WEBSITE
Camera: *ist DS,MZ-50,
Lenses: D-Xenon 50-200mm 4/5.6, pentax smc a 50mm 1.7, Kiron 70-210mm, Pentax SMC DAL 18-55, Asahi 2x Rear tele-converter, Sirius M42 135mm macro, M42 extension tubes 61mm,
Flash: Jessops 360 AFdc
MY WEBSITE
Link
Posted 28/02/2010 - 01:10
Bargain!
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
My website
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
My website
Link
Posted 01/03/2010 - 21:24
NEW IMAGE ADDED TO GALLERY SHOT WITH THE D-XENON 50-200 IF ANYONE WANTS A LOOK.
Camera: *ist DS,MZ-50,
Lenses: D-Xenon 50-200mm 4/5.6, pentax smc a 50mm 1.7, Kiron 70-210mm, Pentax SMC DAL 18-55, Asahi 2x Rear tele-converter, Sirius M42 135mm macro, M42 extension tubes 61mm,
Flash: Jessops 360 AFdc
MY WEBSITE
Camera: *ist DS,MZ-50,
Lenses: D-Xenon 50-200mm 4/5.6, pentax smc a 50mm 1.7, Kiron 70-210mm, Pentax SMC DAL 18-55, Asahi 2x Rear tele-converter, Sirius M42 135mm macro, M42 extension tubes 61mm,
Flash: Jessops 360 AFdc
MY WEBSITE
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.
shanegeach
Member
Orpington, Kent
https://secure.ffordes.com/Shop/Images/used/527607.jpg
i just ordered it
Camera: *ist DS,MZ-50,
Lenses: D-Xenon 50-200mm 4/5.6, pentax smc a 50mm 1.7, Kiron 70-210mm, Pentax SMC DAL 18-55, Asahi 2x Rear tele-converter, Sirius M42 135mm macro, M42 extension tubes 61mm,
Flash: Jessops 360 AFdc
MY WEBSITE