Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Undoubtably. Some time ago I took some pictures with the *ist D and the F717, and I was really disappointed by the softness of the *ist D compared to the sharpness of the F717 :-) However, some of you will recall for sure how much (and how alone) I complained for the *ist D softness here in PDML some months ago. Then I got tired of repeating myself again and again (and bothering you so much on that subject). Nevertheless, the *ist D keeps taking soft pictures. So, why the hell did I buy an *ist D at the end? I must be crazy, or masochist. Yes, enough a plausible explanation. Dario Bonazza (owning so many Pentax lenses and being so much stuck to Pentax for daring to buy a Canon) - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:05 PM Subject: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: > http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html > > This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, > published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt >
Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
What is your flow like? When I first started, I used the *istD with jpg best, so I had to jack up the sharpen, saturation, and contrast settings to avoid a PS fixup afterwards. I was not happy with the results, so I switched to RAW. But the Pentax convertor was a pain, and the only way to get 16 files was in TIFF, another pain. Just recently I purchased an upgrade to my PS, the new PhotoShop-CS (creative suite or version 8). This is a much better tool, and I have noticed that not only is the final result sharper, but the colors are truer also. But the best part is the fact that it can import Pentax RAW directly, without going through the crappy Pentax convertor. rg Dario Bonazza wrote: Undoubtably. Some time ago I took some pictures with the *ist D and the F717, and I was really disappointed by the softness of the *ist D compared to the sharpness of the F717 :-) However, some of you will recall for sure how much (and how alone) I complained for the *ist D softness here in PDML some months ago. Then I got tired of repeating myself again and again (and bothering you so much on that subject). Nevertheless, the *ist D keeps taking soft pictures. So, why the hell did I buy an *ist D at the end? I must be crazy, or masochist. Yes, enough a plausible explanation. Dario Bonazza (owning so many Pentax lenses and being so much stuck to Pentax for daring to buy a Canon) - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:05 PM Subject: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
I'm used to shoot best quality jpegs, and then crop (when necessary), color balance (when necessary), add some proper USM (always) and so on. I understand the Photoshop CS plugin works better than any RAW converter (standalone or plugin) using the damn Pentax algorithm, but is it possible that buying Photo$hop 8 is the only way for getting acceptable RAW conversion? However, yesterday I took some pictures with the DA 16-45 in Verona, and I'm pleased with the results. Good sharpness in direct sunlight (1/250 f11 ISO200 and all the Saints in Heaven helping the lens performance) and great nighttime results (slow speeds f/4.5 800 ISO). Dario Bonazza (not so unhappy with the *ist D ;-) - Original Message - From: "Gonz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 10:00 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > What is your flow like? When I first started, I used the *istD with jpg > best, so I had to jack up the sharpen, saturation, and contrast settings > to avoid a PS fixup afterwards. I was not happy with the results, so I > switched to RAW. But the Pentax convertor was a pain, and the only way > to get 16 files was in TIFF, another pain. Just recently I purchased an > upgrade to my PS, the new PhotoShop-CS (creative suite or version 8). > This is a much better tool, and I have noticed that not only is the > final result sharper, but the colors are truer also. But the best part > is the fact that it can import Pentax RAW directly, without going > through the crappy Pentax convertor. > > rg > > > Dario Bonazza wrote: > > >Undoubtably. Some time ago I took some pictures with the *ist D and the > >F717, and I was really disappointed by the softness of the *ist D compared > >to the sharpness of the F717 :-) > > > >However, some of you will recall for sure how much (and how alone) I > >complained for the *ist D softness here in PDML some months ago. Then I got > >tired of repeating myself again and again (and bothering you so much on that > >subject). Nevertheless, the *ist D keeps taking soft pictures. > > > >So, why the hell did I buy an *ist D at the end? I must be crazy, or > >masochist. Yes, enough a plausible explanation. > > > >Dario Bonazza > >(owning so many Pentax lenses and being so much stuck to Pentax for daring > >to buy a Canon) > > > >----- Original Message - > >From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:05 PM > >Subject: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > > > >>Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: > >>http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html > >> > >>This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, > >>published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html > >> > >>Jens Bladt > >>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Hi! JB> Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: JB> http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html JB> This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, JB> published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html Jens, isn't it correct that Sony boasts Carl Zeiss optic? Here is one shot of mine with Pentax lens: http://www.webaperture.com/gallery/photos/43209 Boris ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Hi Boris That is really very sharp! Very nice photograph, Boris. My Pentax shots were made - not at f11 but more like 4-5.6. And the autofocus caught the wrong point, I guess: http://www.fotokritik.dk/visstort.html?pic=80252 Not too bad for full aperure, I think. More of my Pentax photographs came out usable, than the Sony shots, made the same day. The Sony has too slow AF for action-shots like these. I guess the optics were calculated by Carl Zeiss, not manufactured by Carl Zeiss. Unlike the optics in the later SONY DSC F828. All the best Jens mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 5. juli 2004 22:39 Til: Jens Bladt Emne: Re: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm Hi! JB> Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: JB> http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html JB> This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, JB> published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html Jens, isn't it correct that Sony boasts Carl Zeiss optic? Here is one shot of mine with Pentax lens: http://www.webaperture.com/gallery/photos/43209 Boris ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Hi Boris! I have a chance to get a SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm at at a fairly reasonable price. Just want to confirm that this is the lens you used in the Parrot pic. It's positively stunning! Don > -Original Message- > From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 3:39 PM > To: Jens Bladt > Subject: Re: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > Hi! > > JB> Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: > JB> http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html > > JB> This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, > JB> published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html > > Jens, isn't it correct that Sony boasts Carl Zeiss optic? > > Here is one shot of mine with Pentax lens: > http://www.webaperture.com/gallery/photos/43209 > > Boris > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]) >
RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Beautiful pics Jens! I've been looking at the SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm. Now I'm seriously looking! Hope I can learn to use it as well as you! Don > -Original Message- > From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 6:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > Hi Boris > That is really very sharp! Very nice photograph, Boris. > My Pentax shots were made - not at f11 but more like 4-5.6. And the > autofocus caught the wrong point, I guess: > http://www.fotokritik.dk/visstort.html?pic=80252 > > Not too bad for full aperure, I think. More of my Pentax photographs came > out usable, than the Sony shots, made the same day. The Sony has > too slow AF > for action-shots like these. > > I guess the optics were calculated by Carl Zeiss, not manufactured by Carl > Zeiss. Unlike the optics in the later SONY DSC F828. > All the best > Jens > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 5. juli 2004 22:39 > Til: Jens Bladt > Emne: Re: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > Hi! > > JB> Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: > JB> http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html > > JB> This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, > JB> published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html > > Jens, isn't it correct that Sony boasts Carl Zeiss optic? > > Here is one shot of mine with Pentax lens: > http://www.webaperture.com/gallery/photos/43209 > > Boris > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > >
RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Thanks, Don. This focal length is great for sports, street events, theatre and concerts etc. It's a very good lens - but slow (4-5.6) - if you can live with the small aperture it's a brilliant choise. I paid almost 300 USD for mine 5 yeras ago in near mint condition, which was considered cheep. I would prefere a 2.8, though. But that would be expensive. The Tokina ATX 2.8/80-200 is app. 1000 USD here. Tamron makes the SP AF70-210mm F/2.8 LD(IF), which is supposed to be very good. Its app. 800 USD. Pentax makes a SMC FA ED IF 2.8/80-200mm - or is it discontinued? But Pentax is often way to expensive for me - this lens is app. 5000 USD here (list price). All the best. Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 6. juli 2004 01:25 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm Beautiful pics Jens! I've been looking at the SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm. Now I'm seriously looking! Hope I can learn to use it as well as you! Don > -Original Message- > From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 6:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > Hi Boris > That is really very sharp! Very nice photograph, Boris. > My Pentax shots were made - not at f11 but more like 4-5.6. And the > autofocus caught the wrong point, I guess: > http://www.fotokritik.dk/visstort.html?pic=80252 > > Not too bad for full aperure, I think. More of my Pentax photographs came > out usable, than the Sony shots, made the same day. The Sony has > too slow AF > for action-shots like these. > > I guess the optics were calculated by Carl Zeiss, not manufactured by Carl > Zeiss. Unlike the optics in the later SONY DSC F828. > All the best > Jens > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 5. juli 2004 22:39 > Til: Jens Bladt > Emne: Re: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > Hi! > > JB> Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: > JB> http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html > > JB> This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, > JB> published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html > > Jens, isn't it correct that Sony boasts Carl Zeiss optic? > > Here is one shot of mine with Pentax lens: > http://www.webaperture.com/gallery/photos/43209 > > Boris > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > >
RE: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Thanks Boris, Actually I spend enough time on the KMP site that I've downloaded a local copy to my machine to make it faster to browse. I also look at the Pentax Lenses Review site quite often: http://home.att.net/~alnem/html/pentax_zooms.html They don't mention the Takumar F 4-5.6/70-210 but do warn against the Takumar/Pentax-F 70-200/4-5.6. I learned about the cheaper "Takumar" AF lenses a while back, the hard way. Bought a couple of them and sold them again within a week, found them to be poor in build and performance. Don > -Original Message- > From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 11:15 PM > To: Don Sanderson > Subject: Re: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > Hi! > > DS> Hi Boris! > DS> I have a chance to get a SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm at at a fairly > reasonable > DS> price. > DS> Just want to confirm that this is the lens you used in the Parrot pic. > DS> It's positively stunning! > > According to Boz's site it is the only one that Pentax produced with > this designation. One has to be careful NOT to buy Takumar F > 4-5.6/70-210 though. I would strong suggest that you visit Boz's site > before you buy. > > http://kmp.bdimitrov.de. > > Boris > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]) >
