Not to mention diffraction which appears earlier with the APS-C sensors we have. Optimum Fstop is about 11-16 on the DFA 100mm according to my tests

Oh. ok, yep that's what I want, I'll have a look (I'm using *istD).
Thanks.

I have a softbox I created from acrylic for my 360FGZ, and last night I created a small one which fits over the on camera flash. I'll post some images later if they work at all, what I was interested in was if you know of an easy way to control the flash output from the camera, is this just a set GN or is there some function to change this? I couldn't find anything.

Oh, nice images too. I'm hoping to get a bit of rim lighting underneath the fungi.

Just wondering whether anyone has tried using their onboard camera flash as fill when using wireless mode for macro?

I don't particularly like the look of a ringflash (and don't have one anyway) but realise the fill should be directly above the lens, so I'm figuring the onboard flash will do nicely. Trouble is, can I decrease power on this independantly (using *istD), or do I need to use some ND filters on the front? I plan to create a softbox of some sort for it so it will be diffused anyway.

I'll be using a DFA 100mm f2.8 with this. Planning on shooting toadstool/other fungi for a Uni assignment initially.

Any help appreciated.

Yup, I have a half used roll of Velvia in my MZ5n I haven't used for 4 months or so.

It makes me wonder, now most of us are using digital for the majority of our work, maybe we should be using standard film rather than pro spec stuff.

Most of us are likely to have our film bodies hanging around feeling very neglected for a long time with the ocassional image being shot on film.

I'll second that. I just received my DFA 100mm 2.8 a few weeks ago, absolutely love it. Very happy, I realise the Tamron has excellent write ups as well but I can't see how it can beat the genuine Pentax.

I've decided I'd rather shoot without a certain focal length for a bit longer in order to get the best glass I can. And that of course is Pentax

Yep, I've done exactly the same many times with reasonable results. Light falloff is very obvious though so a good bit of photoshop experience helps to get what you want.

Thanks, so my conclusions are pretty right.

I never seriously thought about it and as I said, I'm pretty set on the AF 2.8 model.

These days I'd rather save the money I'd usually spend on 4 or 5 lenses and buy one, so long as it has the best quality Pentax can give.

Apart from buying something in the "normal" range at the moment, I'm also in the market for a good macro - 100mm almost a must.

I'm pretty much set on the new DFA 2.8 version but in my daily scouring of ebay, I found a number of these PFA F3.5 100mm macro pentax lenses going for unbelievable prices.

I had a look at Bojidar Dimitrovs site and he states the lens may have been made (or designed) by Cosina but used Pentax glass, electronics and SMC coating.

On first look I couldn't believe it was Pentax, it looked so much like the phoenix and other brands of that ilk that I thought it may have even been a copy and I even double checked to see that it said PENTAX and not something like PENNTAX but, yes, it's a Pentax.

Does anyone have experience with this lens?
To me it looks like the tackiest thing Pentax have ever brought out, but I'm interested to know if the glass is actually sharp???

Thanks.

Why an "L" on an L series Canon lens?
at least a star is pretty

To the best of my knowledge pentax put the star on lenseas they designate as a top optic, and the glass is the best glass they can get. They're not likely to tekk you what that means but so far I haven't heard of a * lens which isn't fantastic optically.

I assume all pentax are limited editions here, as no-one stocks them