Just had a wicked thought. The dog is always on a lead because she would head off and not come back for ages (from bitter experience...). Now, if she could be trained to come back when the light is right, she would get her exercise and I could do slooow photography ...

Yes, the Irix is bigger and heavier than most 100mm macros. But when you're used to carrying a camera with DA* 300mm f4 + TC attached, it seems small and light weight!

If you do get to the NEC show, I hope they offer you a discount.

Steve

Another one for BarryE (and a bit heavy on pictures). Here's what it's like for shooting into bright light. Can't get much brighter than the sun. No subtlety here, just focus and shoot in Av with the sun in different places in the frame. Lens hood on for all. Same processing as before. It was hard to get any artefacts at all and definitely not a lens for starbursts. There's one artefact in the opening sequence and a couple in the last two shot through trees, but that's about it out of a much bigger set. (The hint of banding in some of the opening sequence is probably a jpg issue as I can't see it in raw.)

"slooow photography" - so you don't do it while walking a dog??

Don't feel obliged to press the button ... but I'm enjoying this lens and it sounds like you would too


































Steve

The focussing was a surprise to me when I got home and saw them on a big screen. Particularly as I wear varifocals that were tending to mist up when looking through the viewfinder. I don't think I could have done it with any of my AF lenses, the focus rings rotate too easily. But of course, that might be different for someone else.

The Irix team say they are photographers who want to "create the photographic products they had always wished to have in their hands". I can't comment on their other lenses, but at least for this one it's perhaps a bit more than just marketing hype.

Steve

This one for Barry E. Here are a few non-macro pictures, focus ranging from about 20 yards to about 3/4 mile. Done while walking the dog, K3 held by one hand, other hand holding dog on lead and focussing with a couple of fingers, so challenging to say the least! SR on. Aperture and ISO chosen to give exposure time less than 1/(1.5f). Viewfinder with OME53 magnifying eyecup. Minimal processing of DNG files, slight sharpening of raw then sharpen (USM) after resizing to 1200px horizontal.

Focussing was easier than I expected, the focus ring rotates smoothly and precisely with a reasonable amount of 'resistance'. The short distance on the focus ring between near distance and infinity means you've got to be careful. But it's possible and should be even easier with a tripod and live view.

1. Focus on gate, guess about 20 yards away




2. Focus on gate, guess about 150 yards away




3. Focus on swans, guess about 3-400 yards away




4. Focus on pole in centre, guess about 3/4 mile away




Make of them what you will!

Steve

And now for some pictures.

Catkins at f2.8, f5.6 and f11. Not 1:1, just a convenient subject for checking effect of varying aperture. Focussed on front of nearest catkin, background a long distance behind (relatively). Outdoors in shade. A still day but can't guarantee the catkins were perfectly still. K3 + Irix 150mm, tripod + 2 sec delay. DNG files, slight sharpening at raw, resize to 800px then sharpen (USM).

f2.8




f5.6




f11




Steve

As promised, here's a graph of magnification vs working distance for the Irix 150 and Sigma 105. Strictly speaking, it's magnification relative to size at minimum focus distance. I've assumed for each lenses that magnification at its minimum focus distance is 1:1 as manufacturers claim. All done using a low tech, quick and dirty method involving a metre rule and a large bolt, so not high precision measurements, but good enough to show what's happening for those who like to know such things.




Photos still to come. Just recovering from weekend visit by daughter, 3 year old granddaughter, some pink rabbits and a couple of unicorns. Photography had to take 2nd place to entertaining the child.

Steve

Not much spare time at the moment due to sick wife, visitors, work etc. - the usual stuff of life. Pictures will have to come later. But some quick replies now.
- Aperture control is like any Pentax lens that doesn't have an aperture ring, it's done from the camera body in the usual way. If you need an aperture ring for what you want to do, the Irix isn't for you.
- The contacts on the lens mount are what you would expect for a Pentax lens. A lever opens and closes the aperture. The pictures on the Irix website are not the Pentax version.
- I don't have any extension tubes so can't check them out. I can't see why tubes wouldn't work with the Irix if they work with other lenses without an aperture ring. I've occasionally used the Pentax 1.4 TC with the old Sigma. Trying it with the Irix is on my list of things to do when time permits.
- I've not tried the Irix at non-macro distances yet other than a couple of shots to check it worked and see what it felt like. Again, it's on my list of things to do when time permits.
- Algi is, of course, right about the distance scale having very little space as you approach inf. But although the angle of turn between 1m and inf is about the same on the Irix as on the old Sigma, the barrel diameter is much bigger on the Irix and focussing seems smoother (at least with my hands). So I wouldn't be surprised if MF at longer distances is easier on the Irix, although still more difficult than with a non-macro 150mm.
- I'll try shooting into the sun when it puts in an appearance. Currently doing its best to hide behind cloud whenever I've got a free moment. I too am interested in finding out when the lens hood is really needed. The ePhotozine review includes a picture with a bright light at the top edge and the statement "Flare resistance is also very impressive and in fact, no evidence of flare is to be found.". So I'm hopeful.
- I've got some graphs of magnification vs. distance from front of lens to subject, for both the Irix and old Sigma. Currently sitting in a spreadsheet. I'll post them when I can work out how to put them in a format that can be posted.
- For Mike-P - I'm in the County Town. For those who don't know the County Town of Dorset - shame on you!!

Incidentally, the ePhotozine review says that focusing is down to 0.345m or 0.92 feet. That should be 1.13 ft. The distance on the lens is correct, the incorrect number presumably comes from copying what is on the Irix website. If you can't trust an ePhotozine reviewer, who can you trust...??

Steve

With all the excitement about the new Pentax lenses, has anyone noticed the new Irix 150mm macro?

I’ve acquired one because of niggling limitations of my film-era Sigma 105mm macro: not WR, fairly short working distance at 1:1 magnification and big extension when focussing. Buying a newly released lens is not usually my thing, but with a non-UK purchase the only current option and goodness knows what going to happen at the end of March, it seemed sensible to go for it now. John Riley’s ePhotozine review (not with a Pentax) appeared just in time to be a sanity check before pressing the ’buy’ button. It didn’t put me off, so the button was pressed. Here are some first thoughts.

The review is spot on. The lens seems well built, has all that a macro lens needs, handles well and sits nicely on a K3. Colours seem more accurate than the Sigma, presumably because of more modern lens coatings. It’s over twice the weight of the Sigma, but strangely doesn't feel like it on the camera. Lack of AF is not an issue for me, I never use it for macro. No front extension when focussing is a pleasure and WR is taken on trust – I am not going to run it under a tap to check it out!

Working distance is not so straightforward. At minimum focus distance (1:1 magnification), front of lens to subject is about 18cm for the Irix, 12cm for the Sigma (my measurements). However, the front element of the Sigma is well set back from the front of the lens so I rarely use a lens hood. The front element of the Irix is not set back so its lens hood may be needed. Minimum working distance from front of hood to subject is about the same as for the Sigma without lens hood. Of course, as distance to subject increases and magnification decreases, the presence of the Irix lens hood becomes less significant.

The Irix now sits next to the Sigma on my lens shelf. Time will tell which one I reach for most. But all in all, the Irix seems to be a worthwhile addition to the macro repertoire for Pentax.

Steve
PS: My first post in 10 years. Something vaguely useful to say at last!

Hi

My name is Steve and I wish to confess my photographic sins:

- I take photographs, not digital images.
- I don't care about the ultimate in resloution and sharpness, only whether they are good enough.
- I would rather take a photo that is interesting than technically perfect.
- If I like it, that's good. If my family and friends like it, that's wonderful. The opinion of the internet doesn't interest me.
- I don't replace my camera whenever a new model arrives on the scene, old friends are usually the best.
- I don't lust after lenses that are better than my technique.
- One of my cameras is not a Pentax.

I get the feeling that there might be some people around here with similar weaknesses

Steve