Re: Re: Build quality of lenses
You prefer A50/1.4 or FA 50/1.4 to other 50mm from different companies? Alek Uytkownik Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: What about K35/2.0 and FA35/2.0? Those three lenses are considered to be the best PEntax 35mm lens. Which one do you recommend? Alek Some people believe that A50/1.7 is even sharper than A50/1.4? True or false. You wrote you prefer 1.4 version Alek, I believe the best 35mm may be the current FA 35/2, although I haven't tried them all. I prefer the 50/1.4 not only to other Pentax 50s (which are also very good), but to most other manufacturer's 50mms. --Mike Mike Johnston See my weekly online column about photography at either of these two locations: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sunday1.shtml http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/smp_index.html Also, check out my new monthly column in the English _Black White Photography_ magazine! ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Masz do pacenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - za konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Re: Build quality of lenses
Most manufacturers build excellent 50mm f1.4 lenses. They have to because it is the single focal length that most people stress. However, it is the complete lot that really matters and, on a whole, the Pentax prime lenses are unmatched IMHO. Between the A and F/FA, they are designed for different functions and the A will offer longer service because the build quality was sacrificed for A-F speed. Bob Rapp - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 9:43 PM Subject: Re: Re: Build quality of lenses You prefer A50/1.4 or FA 50/1.4 to other 50mm from different companies? Alek Uytkownik Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: What about K35/2.0 and FA35/2.0? Those three lenses are considered to be the best PEntax 35mm lens. Which one do you recommend? Alek Some people believe that A50/1.7 is even sharper than A50/1.4? True or false. You wrote you prefer 1.4 version Alek, I believe the best 35mm may be the current FA 35/2, although I haven't tried them all. I prefer the 50/1.4 not only to other Pentax 50s (which are also very good), but to most other manufacturer's 50mms. --Mike Mike Johnston See my weekly online column about photography at either of these two locations: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sunday1.shtml http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/smp_index.html Also, check out my new monthly column in the English _Black White Photography_ magazine! ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Masz do pacenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - za konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Re: Re: Build quality of lenses
And optically which is better?A or FA? Alek Uytkownik Bob Rapp [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Most manufacturers build excellent 50mm f1.4 lenses. They have to because it is the single focal length that most people stress. However, it is the complete lot that really matters and, on a whole, the Pentax prime lenses are unmatched IMHO. Between the A and F/FA, they are designed for different functions and the A will offer longer service because the build quality was sacrificed for A-F speed. Bob Rapp - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 9:43 PM Subject: Re: Re: Build quality of lenses You prefer A50/1.4 or FA 50/1.4 to other 50mm from different companies? Alek Uytkownik Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: What about K35/2.0 and FA35/2.0? Those three lenses are considered to be the best PEntax 35mm lens. Which one do you recommend? Alek Some people believe that A50/1.7 is even sharper than A50/1.4? True or false. You wrote you prefer 1.4 version Alek, I believe the best 35mm may be the current FA 35/2, although I haven't tried them all. I prefer the 50/1.4 not only to other Pentax 50s (which are also very good), but to most other manufacturer's 50mms. --Mike Mike Johnston See my weekly online column about photography at either of these two locations: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sunday1.shtml http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/smp_index.html Also, check out my new monthly column in the English _Black White Photography_ magazine! ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Masz do pacenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - za konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Dobry adres nie jest zy! Bd sob! Wybierz wasn domen! http://domeny.onet.pl/oferta_domeny.html
Re: Build quality of lenses
As an amateur, I do this because I enjoy it, so the feel of the equipment and the actual experience of being out there shooting is really important. OTOH, I have found that I come to appreciate the feel of equipment that gives me better images. It's hard to get attached to a mechanically great but optically lousy lens. I think that most folks simply do get to try a great range of equipment. I have come to appreciate my MZ-S with use. I'm not sure I would have felt strongly just trying it in a camera store. I think this is especialy true for getting used to an interface. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Build quality of lenses
In a message dated 12/6/2002 10:46:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: for me, the process is secondary so long as i get the results i want when i want them and the equipment doesn't get in the way. the equipment job is to stay out of my way. Herb... Yup. That's what I want. I am not there yet, since I am still learning, I am still naturally thinking about the camera a bit more than I would like. I've done a lot of drawing. So, at this point in time, the pencil becomes an extension of my eye and hand. Sure, I use the side or tip of the pencil, but without thinking about it too much. It's sort of automatic. Basically the pencil becomes transparent to my drawing experience. I want this same thing from a camera (some day). For it to become an extension of my eyes and hands (not sure how that will work with a tripod) -- as automatic and as transparent as possible to my photography experience. But the experience is primary. The results are also primary (without results I probably wouldn't indulge in the experience in the first place -- i.e., the process). IMHO, they can't really be divorced from one another. For me, only a good experience will yield good results. Doe aka Marnie Hmmm, guess I did differ somewhat from what you said.
Re: Build quality of lenses
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Yup. That's what I want. I am not there yet, since I am still learning, I am still naturally thinking about the camera a bit more than I would like. that is something that comes with practice and trying to understand the reasons for your failures as well as your sucesses. right now, you are at a stage where learning the technology is very important so that you know what it is capable of doing and what it isn't. with time, you will be able to know without thinking that certain things will work or not and what you might have to do to make it work. then comes the next and very hard step, knowing what is worth trying to make work. Herb
Re: Build quality of lenses
Dan Scott wrote: I find that the equipment feeds my appreciation of my environment. I thought I was pretty observant and continually got feedback from others indicating the same, but I found I had missed out on a veritable feast of visual delight before I acquired my FA 100/2.8 and started looking for opportunities to use it. Same way with other items including, to my surprise, my tripod. You mean the 100/2.8 Macro? I have one of those and its probably the best photographic item I ever bought. The front garden is now a feast of photographic opportunity. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Build quality of lenses
On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 09:42 PM, David A. Mann wrote: You mean the 100/2.8 Macro? I have one of those and its probably the best photographic item I ever bought. The front garden is now a feast of photographic opportunity. Cheers, - Dave The very same. :-) Dan Scott
Re: Build quality of lenses
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? I take pictures because I like using cameras. The feel of the equipment means as much or more to me as the picture. A commendable reply William! I don't care a whit about focus feel myself as long as I like the resulting image, but I can appreciate your opinion and respect the fact that you're one of the few focus feel fans who doesn't try to rationalize it into something affecting their photos. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Build quality of lenses
What is the quality (optics) of K35/3.5?Do you recommend it? It is a real jewel. Optical quality is fantastic. It is small and light and built very well. This is why I enjoy using it with the LX. Does anyone know if this lens is the same optical design as the screwmount version with the same specs? --Mike
Re: Build quality of lenses
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I would argue that the experience we have of the equipment affects not only the photographs, but _whether_ we photograph or not. Various large-format photographers have reported a fascination with the groundglass image, and one (sorry, I can't remember who) said that sometimes the actual exposure of the film seems secondary. for me, the process is secondary so long as i get the results i want when i want them and the equipment doesn't get in the way. the equipment's job is to stay out of my way. Herb...
Re: Build quality of lenses
What about K35/2.0 and FA35/2.0? Those three lenses are considered to be the best PEntax 35mm lens. Which one do you recommend? Alek Some people believe that A50/1.7 is even sharper than A50/1.4? True or false. You wrote you prefer 1.4 version Alek, I believe the best 35mm may be the current FA 35/2, although I haven't tried them all. I prefer the 50/1.4 not only to other Pentax 50s (which are also very good), but to most other manufacturer's 50mms. --Mike Mike Johnston See my weekly online column about photography at either of these two locations: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sunday1.shtml http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/smp_index.html Also, check out my new monthly column in the English _Black White Photography_ magazine!
: Re: Build quality of lenses
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? I take pictures because I like using cameras. The feel of the equipment means as much or more to me as the picture. I'd like to add my 2 cents worth in. There is a certain pleasure in working with something that is well engineered and made. An enjoyment in the tactile feel of it. The analogy of a musician strikes me as being similar. A great guitarist can make a $50 Sears guitar sound wonderful, but most will play well set up Strats, or Les Pauls, or maybe a custom body. I played bass in a blues band in the 80's and I loved the feel of old Fender precisions (I had a 64 with a B neck). Did it make me a better bass player? not really. Did it add to my enjoyment? most definitely. I find the same is true for me with cameras. I like the feel of older Pentax lenses and bodies. They don't make me a better photographer, but they add to my enjoyment. I would consider feel ONE of the criteria in buying a new (to me) lens or body. BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: : Re: Build quality of lenses
BUT, if you enjoy playing a P-Bass more than the $50 Sears copy, you'll play it more often, practise more often, and therefore become a better player. If you enjoy the tactile feel of a certain camera and lenses, you'll take more pictures, and (eventually), become a better photographer. Won't you? regards, frank Butch Black wrote: I'd like to add my 2 cents worth in. There is a certain pleasure in working with something that is well engineered and made. An enjoyment in the tactile feel of it. The analogy of a musician strikes me as being similar. A great guitarist can make a $50 Sears guitar sound wonderful, but most will play well set up Strats, or Les Pauls, or maybe a custom body. I played bass in a blues band in the 80's and I loved the feel of old Fender precisions (I had a 64 with a B neck). Did it make me a better bass player? not really. Did it add to my enjoyment? most definitely. I find the same is true for me with cameras. I like the feel of older Pentax lenses and bodies. They don't make me a better photographer, but they add to my enjoyment. I would consider feel ONE of the criteria in buying a new (to me) lens or body. BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself Hermann Hesse (Demian) -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: : Re: Build quality of lenses
on 12/6/02 7:43 PM, Butch Black at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? I take pictures because I like using cameras. The feel of the equipment means as much or more to me as the picture. I may be just some sort of fanatic but I want the pictures. I had an opportunity to use a 200-400mm F4.0 and a 50-300mm F 4.5. I own and use a 80-400mm VR. I love the two old zooms and they are often thought to be some beautiful examples of Nikon or Nikkor engineering. I am afraid they would not be very helpful to me. I have spent the day with the 80-400Vr mounted on an F100 and hung around my neck. Those old beauties will never have the opportunity to hang on my neck and further more they really want a tripod under them to get the maximum sharpness. Are they well made? Absolutely, well made to the point of being over engineered and over built. Ed Tyler
Re: Build quality of lenses
Oh, stop. There isn't anything that you give up in the way of feel when you're using a F100. I don't have, or have used the 80-400VR, but so long as the zoom control feels OK, who cares? It's not like you need the focus ring for much of anything with that body. BR From: Ed Tyler [EMAIL PROTECTED] I may be just some sort of fanatic but I want the pictures. I had an opportunity to use a 200-400mm F4.0 and a 50-300mm F 4.5. I own and use a 80-400mm VR. I love the two old zooms and they are often thought to be some beautiful examples of Nikon or Nikkor engineering. I am afraid they would not be very helpful to me. I have spent the day with the 80-400Vr mounted on an F100 and hung around my neck. Those old beauties will never have the opportunity to hang on my neck and further more they really want a tripod under them to get the maximum sharpness. Are they well made? Absolutely, well made to the point of being over engineered and over built.
Re: Build quality of lenses
- Original Message - From: Thomas Heide Clausen Subject: Build quality of lenses On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:25:22 -0600 William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Thomas Heide Clausen Subject: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why? Then let me rephrase: am I the only one who is discouraged by the build quality of almost all AF lenses? I think they feel like junk, myself. The Pentax Limited lenses are an exception, but they use metal where plastic would do the job. William Robb
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? Good question. Focus feel has never been visible in any photograph I've ever taken. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:04:58 -0500 Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? Good question. Focus feel has never been visible in any photograph I've ever taken. It's probably two things: something that feels good inspires more confidentiality in the gears abilities to last and, secondly, it makes it a more pleasureable experience using it. Obsession...hmm...a strong word to use, I think
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
Good point. My Sigma 70-300 APO (the older MF version) has _terrible_ feel, flares badly, wobbles, and is butt-ugly. But I find it a useful lens and am unlikely to ever purchase another 70-to-Something zoom. In fact, the major reason I purchased the Pentax A 35-70 f4 last week was to use both in a 2-lens kit for those times when primes are just too much hassle. -Lon Mark Roberts wrote: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? Good question. Focus feel has never been visible in any photograph I've ever taken.
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentaxand why?)
why this obsession with feel? Good question. Focus feel has never been visible in any photograph I've ever taken. Good question indeed, and certainly a valid personal philosophy. I suppose for me it's because the pictures I take are 60% of my enjoyment of my photography hobby, while the experience of operating the camera and appreciating it as a mechanism accounts for the other 40%. There's really no photographic reason why we need to like cameras--I actually know some very accomplished and renowned photographers who claim to hate everything about cameras--but still, it's something I personally value. --Mike Ain't photography grand. The more you know the less you know. (Shel Belinkoff) * * * Find out about Mike Johnston's unique photography newsletter, The 37th Frame, at http://www.37thframe.com.
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Re: Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and wh=
y?)?= Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: onet.poczta Hi, What is the quality (optics) of K35/3.5?Do you recommend it? Alek Uytkownik David A. Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Thomas Heide Clausen wrote: Then let me rephrase: am I the only one who is discouraged by the build quality of almost all AF lenses? Nope, you're not the only one. I was fortunately enough to be in Japan this summer, where I visited the Pentax Forum in Tokyo. Pretty much every concievable piece of Pentax equipment, historical and otherwise, was on exhibision - most of the current prod. line was even available for fondeling. Exciting, except that I was disappointed to find that a lot of the AF stuff felt very much el-cheapo. Did you handle the FA*24mm f/2.0? Thats one of the best-built AF lenses out there. The long F*/FA* lenses are also very well made. The FA 100mm f/2.8 macro looks a little plasticky but feels a lot tougher than it looks (its actually metal). My only gripe is that the lens barrel rattles a little. But nothing compares to the old stuff. The original K-mount lenses are my favourites, followed by the A-series lenses. I'm sure I'd like the screwmount gear but I've never used it. There were gems among, which felt differet. The limited series, e.g. Yes, the Limiteds are superb and the build is exactly why I chose the 43mm over an FA 50mm. It was well worth the extra money. I won't be buying a 77mm unless something happens to my A*85mm, but I might buy a 31mm someday. Again, the optical quality of the 24-90 is good, however the feel is el-cheapo, somehow. Maybe I am just being really really old-fashioned...? Sounds to me like you're enjoying the use of your gear as much as the photos you take with it. Its a good way to be, IMO. Love is an LX with the K-35mm f/3.5. Or a silver K2 with the 43mm Limited. Or... Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Masz do pacenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - za konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Good question indeed, and certainly a valid personal philosophy. I suppose for me it's because the pictures I take are 60% of my enjoyment of my photography hobby, while the experience of operating the camera and appreciating it as a mechanism accounts for the other 40%. for me, the discussions on focus feel are like discussing the paint job on a race car. Herb...
Re: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Re: Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and wh=
What is the quality (optics) of K35/3.5?Do you recommend it? In one word: Superb. Fred
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
for me, the discussions on focus feel are like discussing the paint job on a race car. I don't buy that analogy. Paint on a car is cosmetic. Focus feel in a lens is ~functional~. I think, if you want to stick to a race car analogy, focus feel is more like steering feel, or the feel of the gear shift lever in action, etc. Fred
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
I think this is true only when posting to PDML. When I have something important (to me) happening in front of a lens, I: a) do NOT think what camera I have b) Do NOT worry about the lens c) Do NOT remember that I wasn't as kind to my second grade teacher as I should have been. d) Do MOT worry that that stupid plastic zoom som'bitch currently mounted may not be the appropriate lens. Shooting is different from posting, and more fun to boot. None-the-less, PDML is a hoot. And I'm thinking of only shooting with the M 28 f2.8 for a while because it's bad and because when I'm shooting wide angle my shots all look like they were taken by a 4-year-old. -Lon Fred wrote: for me, the discussions on focus feel are like discussing the paint job on a race car. I don't buy that analogy. Paint on a car is cosmetic. Focus feel in a lens is ~functional~. I think, if you want to stick to a race car analogy, focus feel is more like steering feel, or the feel of the gear shift lever in action, etc.
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
I have the one with the silver ring, older, supposedly better. I'm gonna do it ANYHOWS. grin. Mark Roberts wrote: There are two different versions of the M28/2.8 (with different optical designs) and the consensus is that one of them is good. Sorry if that spoils your plan... ;-)
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
On 5 Dec 2002 at 11:14, Herb Chong wrote: for me, the discussions on focus feel are like discussing the paint job on a race car. I disagree, using the race care analogy I'd liken it more to the feel of the feedback through the steering wheel and pedals :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Build quality of lenses (was: Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?)
On 5 Dec 2002 at 10:04, Mark Roberts wrote: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? Good question. Focus feel has never been visible in any photograph I've ever taken. I think you'd be wrong if you looked at it from a technical perspective. I would guess that loose focus translates to slop in the mechanical integrity and hence the potential for de-centering of the optical elements and ultimately a reduction in image quality. Cheers, RobRob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Build quality of lenses
why this obsession with feel? I take pictures because I like using cameras. The feel of the equipment means as much or more to me as the picture. William Robb
