Number 3 is slightly over-exposed, but not burned out anywhere, so this is easily recoverable and would look great with more saturated colours. It is my favourite of the three by far and the composition is gorgeous.

Number 2 requires some persective corection and seems a little tilted to the left? Definitely not one for a competition IMHO.

I can't really comment on number one as car photos are not really my bag, some of the other members are far better quyalified than I am to make observations on this one!

Hope this helps.

Best wishes
David

Hi Paul, I definitely have an Adapt-a-matic and it's a 300mm F5.6 in beautiful original condition. Made in 1972 and hardly a mark on it, it has an M42 Adapt-a-matic mount, and also has a Minolta SRT adptor. I use it on the K-5 and K-x, with a flush-fitting K-mount adaptor permanently fitted.

I bought it on ebay from an old local gentleman for £20 last year and it has to be my best lens bargain to date. It is beautifully made, and sharp when stopped down to F8, although at 5.6 it's a bit ropey. It's very easy to focus as it has a lovely smooth action. Here are a few shots taken with it:










PM me if you want any more information, I appreciate this isn't the same model as you're looking at, but I might be able to give you some useful hints.

Regards
David

Not so terribly affordable then for the majority of us, that's a bit of shock. It's only F5.6 too.

Regards
David

Sincere thanks to everyone who has helped by posting advice in this thread - it has been really helpful. I think on balance I will stick with the 16-45 at present and also make more use of my old M28mm F3.5. I can widen this by stitching images together for panoramics and the IQ is very good.

Best wishes
David

Hello Peter, welcome to the Forum! I tend to agree with you, but then I'm not an 'early adopter' so I probably don't fret about these things too much. It's nice to have up-to-date quality equipment that does the job well, but I have to say that none of my modern lenses beats my 135mm F3.5 SMC Takumar for portraits when teamed up with the K-5, so I can only conclude that lenses haven't advanced too much in the last 30+ years!

Cameras might be a different kettle of fish, but still I don't worry about what's coming next, I wait to see how good it is after others have used it for a while!

Regards
David

He's smashed a cover drive, so not out I think?

Regards
David

I have the Pentax-M 28mm F3.5 and really like it. I use it sparingly, but when I do I usually like the images it produces. Very low distortion and sharp from wide open.

Regards
David

Hi Nigel, the way you have used HDR here is similar to the way I use it - not for effect, but to increase the dynamic range whilst maintaining realism. Although the HDR effect in your images is toned down a bit, I think it's still a little strong to be perfectly natural, but I agree with what you are saying to large degree.

If you want more natural looking shots, then the 'Fusion' setting is the one to go for, not the detail enhancer / tonemapping settings. It's great to have a play with Photomatix and learn how different settings affect the final image.

Regards
David

Thanks for all of the above guys, really excellent advice and feedback. More please!

Regards
David

Has anyone out there got any feedback on the Pentax DA 15mm F4 Limited lens? I've read all the reviews, so I'm only interested in personal experiences from using this lens. Do you like it in 'real world' use? What are it's plus and minus points?

I'm mainly interested in using this lens for landscapes, but as it's an expensive piece of kit and I already have a DA 16-45, I need to be convinced that it will be signiifcantly better than the 16-45 is when used at its 16mm setting.

Many thanks in advance of your help and feedback on this.

Regards
David