Re: AF TC?
As far as I know, there are no pentax af tc's. Does anyone have any 3rd party recommendations for these lenses? Jason Sent via wireless messaging device.
Re: AF TC?
But isn't this the af adapter for mf lenses. The way I understand is that it moves the tc element to make mf lenes af. It does not actually pass the af info to the lens Jason Sent via wireless messaging device.
RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
For a comparison of the elements see: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-i.jpg and http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-ii.gif The internal focus on the FA200 is invaluable for macro work. Plus, the FA is RAZOR sharp at all apertures and even sharper in the f/8 to f/32 range - sharper than the A200. The A200 is very good in the f/8 to f/22 range but not as sharp as the FA200. The FA200 has 9 Aperture Blades vs. the 8 on the A200. This I think leads to a softer bokeh on the FA200. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, But is there any optical difference between A and FA for macro work?Sharpness, bokeh etc?Also FA is better? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: I don\'t have any direct comparison with Cannon or Nikon, but have used both the FA200 ED Macro and the A200 ED Macro. The FA200 (IF) is AWESOME - I can find no faults with it, razor sharp, excellent bokeh, I like the Internal Focus and the focus limiter provides excellent and quick focusing. The A200 is a very good lens but not quite as sharp as the FA200 at the extremes. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... Thank you Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I\\\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Hotele - rezerwuj do 40% TANIEJ! http://noclegi.onet.pl
RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
the macro shots on this page were done with the FA200 http://www.blueplanetmedia.com/photo.htm Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Thank you! You are lucky man to have such a lens. It must be one if not the best in this focal range or any macro lens. Do you have any picture from it on website? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: For a comparison of the elements see: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-i.jpg and http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-ii.gif The internal focus on the FA200 is invaluable for macro work. Plus, the FA is RAZOR sharp at all apertures and even sharper in the f/8 to f/32 range - sharper than the A200. The A200 is very good in the f/8 to f/22 range but not as sharp as the FA200. The FA200 has 9 Aperture Blades vs. the 8 on the A200. This I think leads to a softer bokeh on the FA200. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, But is there any optical difference between A and FA for macro work?Sharpness, bokeh etc?Also FA is better? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: I don\\\'t have any direct comparison with Cannon or Nikon, but have used both the FA200 ED Macro and the A200 ED Macro. The FA200 (IF) is AWESOME - I can find no faults with it, razor sharp, excellent bokeh, I like the Internal Focus and the focus limiter provides excellent and quick focusing. The A200 is a very good lens but not quite as sharp as the FA200 at the extremes. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... Thank you Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I\\\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Hotele - rezerwuj do 40% TANIEJ! http://noclegi.onet.pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
RE: If You had to pick one lens . . .
I would also consider the 100mm f/2.8 Macro. Excellent bokeh, RAZOR sharp, great DOF control. Even though the focal length may be a little long, it will come in handy for the candid and individual shots. + the lens is built like a tank - you definitely get your moneys worth, the AF is also amazingly quick and the MF has a great feel. Jason -Original Message- From: Evan Hanson [mailto:buddha;myrealbox.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 3:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: If You had to pick one lens . . . If your going to consider the 77 and the 50 you have to consider the 43. - Original Message - From: Michael Cross Subject: If You had to pick one lens . . . I am starting out here and looking to purchase (at least for now) one prime lens. My primary photographic interest is candids and casual portraits of my kids in both individual and small group shots. I am looking at a prime lens because I would like to do available light and shallow DOF shots and the quality (especially bokeh) is important to me. So I have narrowed it down to three Pentax lenses: 1. FA 50mm f/1.4 2. FA 77mm f/1.8 3. FA 85mm f/1.4 Which lens would you choose? Any others I should consider? Thanks, Michael Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Focus range Limiter on the FA 100 2.8 Macro
Stve, I believe the operation of this lens is similar to that of the FA200/4 ED. To engage the limiter function, place the limiting switch on the lens to full and adjust the focus to the extreme to which you would like to bias focusing, i.e., infinity for the normal stuff, or max close focus for the macro work, then switch the switch back to limit. That should work every time and really cut down on the hunting. Jason PS - With the MZ-S, I have fould you need to do this with the body turned on. -Original Message- From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Focus range Limiter on the FA 100 2.8 Macro I just got this lens. I plan to use it for macro work (duh) and as a instead of a 135mm telephoto. (The feel of the lens is wonderful by the way. What a tank! It balances so well on the MZ-S with the Grip) I'm having a little trouble getting used to the range limiter, however. I want to us mostly MF for macro work but AF for normal distances. I can't quite get the hang of the limiter, and the lens seems to always hunt through the whole focus range, which is huge. Any suggestions from the Cognoscenti? Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Focus range Limiter on the FA 100 2.8 Macro - RETRY
Steve, I believe the operation of this lens is similar to that of the FA200/4 ED. To engage the limiter function, place the limiting switch on the lens to full and adjust the focus to the extreme to which you would like to bias focusing, i.e., infinity for the normal stuff, or max close focus for the macro work, then switch the switch back to limit. That should work every time and really cut down on the hunting. Jason PS - With the MZ-S, I have found you need to do this with the body turned on. -Original Message- From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Focus range Limiter on the FA 100 2.8 Macro I just got this lens. I plan to use it for macro work (duh) and as a instead of a 135mm telephoto. (The feel of the lens is wonderful by the way. What a tank! It balances so well on the MZ-S with the Grip) I'm having a little trouble getting used to the range limiter, however. I want to us mostly MF for macro work but AF for normal distances. I can't quite get the hang of the limiter, and the lens seems to always hunt through the whole focus range, which is huge. Any suggestions from the Cognoscenti? Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TEST
TEST
RE: MZ-S Battery Grip, New, and Cheap, plus macro
I would second that and even go further to say the BG-10 is essential for any serious use of the MZ-S. Jason -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 12:16 PM To: Lindamood, Mark Subject: Re: MZ-S Battery Grip, New, and Cheap, plus macro Mark, All I can say is if anyone has an MZ-S or is planning to buy one soon, snap up this deal. The MZ-S ergonomics are great with this grip attached! Bruce Tuesday, July 30, 2002, 8:35:29 AM, you wrote: LM Just can't GIVE it away. It just doesn't fit in the camera bag I like to LM carry, what can I say. So, once and for all, folks, it ain't gonna get no LM cheaper than this, $115.00, new in the box (shipping included but USA only). LM Also for sale: 24-50mm SMC-F, very damn nearly mint, still with caps and LM box. $190.00 LM - LM This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, LM go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to LM visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Macro question
Does anyone know how the camera's (MZ-S and Super Program) on-board metering works when there is no communication between the camera and the lens? Specifically, I am using the auto bellows and a 100mm macro lens and am consistently getting underexposed negatives. I generally find +2 to +3 stops of compensation is required to get correct exposure. All of the macro books speak of the difficulties with metering subjects above 1x but then say that if TTL is used this overcomes the necessity of determining the magnification ratio and exposure compensation. My understanding of TTL was that it is Through the Lens Metering that can control not only a Flash but also meters throughout the exposure of a negative to ensure correct exposure. Since the bellows does not communicate with the lens, the camera does not know the F-stop. Hence, I stop down the lens with the cable release, meter (based on the reading in the viewfinder), adjust my shutter speed and, if I believe the camera's reading get an underexposed picture every time. All I can figure is that the camera, if it does not have communication with a lens, assumes some f-stop such as a wide open f2, and this negatively impacts the correct exposure reading. Alternatively, perhaps when the camera is in communication with a lens, TTL works throughout the exposure, and when you switch to manual, you only get the instantaneous reading prior to releasing the shutter and is thus less accurate. Any help is appreciated. Jason - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Recommendations for Wide Angle less than 28mm
What seems to be the consensus for the best (in terms of optical quality and build) for a wide angle lens less than 28mm. I am looking for a good, clean, and razor sharp lens with an angle of view greater than 90(degrees) for some landscape work. It is very important that the distortions be minimal since there are a lot of angles and lines in the scene that will quickly reveal imperfections. Jason - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: MZ-S hiccup
Coincidence? I just had the exact same problem with royal gold 100 36. By chance I was watching the display when the film loaded and happened to catch the MZ-S recognizing the ASA as 200. I went ahead and manually overrode the camera's ASA setting and shot the rest of the roll. However, upon completing the roll, I put the roll in 2 other bodies and to my surprise they BOTH interpreted the DX coding as 100ASA. I inspected the canister and there was nothing apparently wrong, and the next roll inserted into the MZ-S from the same batch read correctly. Jason -Original Message- From: Patrick White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 12:51 PM To: pentaxdiscuss Subject: Re: MZ-S hiccup Alan Chan writes: My MZ-S went bonkers today. Next, I reloaded the camera with a roll of royal gold 100. Camera displayed an ISO of 200. Just wondering, did the Z/PZ-1 have many minor problems like the MZ-S when 1st released? Any idea? I don't know about when first released because my PZ-1p isn't a first-release version, but it got confuddled last summer at the Circus Parade. It thought a roll of 100ISO film was 800ISO. It had no problem with me telling it to shoot it underrated though and the slides were fine. In its case, I'm pretty sure it had overheated.. being a black camera in the full sun of a cloudless, midwestern, July day was aparently too much for it.. the camera was almost uncomfortable to hold it was so hot. If Wendy's MZ-S doesn't get confused again, then I wouldn't worry about it. As for the aperture misread, doesn't the lens have a say in the readout? If so, perhaps the lens' electronics overheated and got confuddled rahter than the camera's. later, patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
WANTED 200mm Macro
SMC PENTAX-A* MACRO 1:4 200mm ED Anyone looking to trade up to the new AF model and sell their manual focus lens? Jason - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: MZ-S Questions
Hi Pat, Thanks for the info. You are right! I went back last night and checked all of the lenses. Only the third party lenses, such as the Tamrom Adaptall SP90mm 2.8, combine the highest f-stop with the auto setting. For this particulal lens, f32 is combined with the Auto mode. This does not pose a problem with the earlier Pentax bodies, but the MZ-S automatically switches to P or Tv mode in this Auto setting. Even after resetting the MZ-S, with the little green button on the front of the body, it reverts back to P or Tv. Also, thanks for clarifying the operatin of the 2P PC adapter. Since the manual does not address its functionality, I was unclear as to whether it had the high speed sync capabliity. Jason -Original Message- From: Pat White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 6:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Fw: MZ-S Questions - Original Message - From: Pat White To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 12:41 PM Subject: Re: MZ-S Questions Jason, I'm not sure what you're seeing, but all the Pentax lenses with an 'A' setting that I'm aware of have the 'A' setting beside f22, not linked with it. You can set 'A', or you can set f22. There should be no conflict. Most Pentax lenses require you to press the lock button to reach the 'A' position, but the 28-200 doesn't (you just turn it past f22). I've used my old Bellows K with the MZ-S. As Bruce mentioned, the base of the camera interferes with the bellows, so you have to loosen the locking ring on the bellows and set it to shoot vertical format, which I don't find to be an inconvenience for the rare times that I use it. I would expect that you could use any bellows unit that allows you to rotate it to a vertical orientation. With the K bellows at least, you can use manual or aperture-priority, but not program or shutter-priority. When you mention 2P sync, are you referring to the 2P PC adapter? That's the hotshoe adapter that provides a PC outlet for cameras that don't have one. It's a simple PC connector, and sync speeds would be as normal, i.e. any speed up to 1/180 for the MZ-S. High-speed sync would call for automation that a PC connector can't provide. Hope this is helpful. Pat White - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Re[3]: MZ-S Questions
Alexander, You are right. That is a good idea and would provide some (which is more than I have now!) albeit limited functionality. Given the length of the distance between the bottom of where the lens attaches and the base of the camera (even w/o the BG-10), this would allow moving the back portion of the bellows a distance that corresponds to the distance the extension ring extends beyond the rear portion of the rail of the bellows. I will try this with the Auto Bellow and post the results. Jason Alexander, You are probably right. I just don't have any tubes hanging around. maybe I'll have to pick one up now. Bruce Monday, January 28, 2002, 11:23:39 AM, you wrote: AK Bruce wrote: AK 2) I have the Pentax Auto Bellows A and I can report AK that the MZ-S does not mate to it. The base of the AK camera (no BG-10) hits into the frame of the bellows AK and won't allow a solid mating. I don't know if AK there are any 3rd party bellows that would work. AK Insert a narrow extension ring between body and AK bellows. AK Alexander - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
