Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, Mat Maessen wrote: 2. Specular highlights tend to flare. I first noticed this in chrome trim on a car. I can point to pictures to demonstrate. Probably due to the large number of glass elements in the lens. Can you please show a picture demonstrating that? I am interested in the artifact. Kostas
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
On 2/7/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Specular highlights tend to flare. I first noticed this in chrome trim on a car. I can point to pictures to demonstrate. Probably due to the large number of glass elements in the lens. Can you please show a picture demonstrating that? I am interested in the artifact. http://www.matoe.org/pics/MINI/roll1/030_28.jpg Give it a while to load, since it's large (1536x1024). Look at the chrome surrounding the headlight on the right side of the picture. -Mat
RE: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
That's not real flare - it's just a mirror refletion of the sun - shaped like a star, caused by the aperture blades. This is flare: http://www.ghostweb.com/lens_1.gif http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/flare.shtml http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/lensflare/lens-flare-tut-shot1.jpg http://www.hash.com/users/joewllms/FlaresReference1.jpg http://dominique.hoffmann.free.fr/photos/phenomen/lens_flare.jpg Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Mat Maessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. februar 2006 16:04 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please On 2/7/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Specular highlights tend to flare. I first noticed this in chrome trim on a car. I can point to pictures to demonstrate. Probably due to the large number of glass elements in the lens. Can you please show a picture demonstrating that? I am interested in the artifact. http://www.matoe.org/pics/MINI/roll1/030_28.jpg Give it a while to load, since it's large (1536x1024). Look at the chrome surrounding the headlight on the right side of the picture. -Mat
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Mat Maessen wrote: On 2/7/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Specular highlights tend to flare. I first noticed this in chrome trim on a car. I can point to pictures to demonstrate. Probably due to the large number of glass elements in the lens. Can you please show a picture demonstrating that? I am interested in the artifact. http://www.matoe.org/pics/MINI/roll1/030_28.jpg Give it a while to load, since it's large (1536x1024). Look at the chrome surrounding the headlight on the right side of the picture. Thanks Mat. I have never been offended by this artifact, I thought it was natural. Goes to tell you :-) Kostas
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Rather rare, isn't it? No, I wouldn't say it's rare. I think it's a little more commonly seen than its sibling, the A 28-135/4. Any comments on the performance of this lens is greatly appreciated, please. The A 35-105/3.5 is an excellent zoom, highly regarded here on the PDML. Its build quality is high (which, of course, means that it's a heavy lens). It is sharp and contrasty, as zoom lenses go. It's so-called macro unction is nothing to write home about, though (as in most so-called macro zooms). I actually prefer the slightly greater versatility (a bit wider zoom range) of the A 28-135/4, and I no longer have either of my A 35-105/3.5's (I did have two of them at one time). It's a very nice focal length for portraits on the D, isn't it (equivalent to 52-202mm on 135 film)? It ought to do very nicely on a Pentax DSLR, I would think. Fred
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It ought to do very nicely on a Pentax DSLR, I would think. So I thought. I have an A 28-135 and was really looking forward to using it on my DS. Tried it once and found that holding this combination for longer than, say, 10 secs would cause cramps in my hands. The DSLRs are simply too lightweight. It takes an LX plus winder on the rear end to balance this lens and make it kind of manageable. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
RE: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Jens if I had to give an award to the three best A zooms here's what I'd pick: A 35-105/3.5 A 70-210/4 A 35-70/4 Fred likes the A 28-135/4, I agree that it's a fine lens. Just too big and heavy for my tastes. The three above, and especially the 35-105, are three I don't believe I'll ever sell, they're that good. Don -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 3:00 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: SV: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please Sorry - it's the 3.5 35-105mm, naturally!!! Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 6. februar 2006 21:43 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please I spotted one of these at a local auction (ends February 12th), which normally won't go too high (limited amount of potential buyers). Rather rare, isn't it? Any comments on the performance of this lens is greatly appreciated, please. It's a very nice focal length for portraits on the D, isn't it (equivalent to 52-202mm on 135 film)? BTW: This guy is also selling a Tokina 80-200 F 4.5. I sold one of these recently. Since I already owned a F 70-210mm, I didn't keep it. BTW: It's an excellent performer, utilizing a macro function. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Hi Jens, I am a great fan of this lens. I have owned three. One broke when I dropped it, so I bought a replacement *and* a spare. g The lens is almost unique among Pentax zooms, in that it offers excellent sharpness, low distortion throughout the zoom range and very smooth bokeh. This is a rare combination. It also offers a useful close focusing facility - not exactly Macro but that's what Pentax call it. The only downside to this lens, if any, is that it is not a true zoom, but a vari-focal lens. The point of focus varies considerably through the zoom range. I found this alarming at first, but the second example I bought was exactly the same. Even if you zoom by only a small amount, it is essential that you re-focus. You will soon get used to it. The lens works extremely well as a portrait lens in the 75~105mm range on film and in the 50~70mm range on the *ist D. Being an A lens it operates in all exposure modes on the *ist D and gives accurate exposures. As I said, I am a great fan. I judge a lens only by its results, and in my opinion, this is a fine optical design. I previously owned an SMC Pentax-M 45-125mm f/4. I bought this lens because of several strong recommendations. However, I have to say that the SMC Pentax-A 35-105mm f/3.5 is a far superior optic, with much lower distortion and exceptional bokeh for a zoom lens. The 45-125mm is sharp, but it distorts badly and the bokeh is relatively harsh. I think you will be very happy with a 35-105mm f/3.5. Regards, Colin -- Original Message Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 21:42:33 +0100 From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I spotted one of these at a local auction (ends February 12th), which normally won't go too high (limited amount of potential buyers). Rather rare, isn't it? Any comments on the performance of this lens is greatly appreciated, please. It's a very nice focal length for portraits on the D, isn't it (equivalent to 52-202mm on 135 film)? BTW: This guy is also selling a Tokina 80-200 F 4.5. I sold one of these recently. Since I already owned a F 70-210mm, I didn't keep it. BTW: It's an excellent performer, utilizing a macro function. Regards Jens ___ NEW Yahoo! Cars - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online! http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/
RE: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
I had one of these and it was the worst Pentax lens I ever owned. It was so bad that when I was burgled, they had the good sense to leave it behind. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 February 2006 20:43 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please I spotted one of these at a local auction (ends February 12th), which normally won't go too high (limited amount of potential buyers). Rather rare, isn't it? Any comments on the performance of this lens is greatly appreciated, please.
RE: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
I had one of these and it was very good indeed. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 February 2006 21:00 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: SV: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please Sorry - it's the 3.5 35-105mm, naturally!!! Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
I had one of these and it was the worst Pentax lens I ever owned. It was so bad that when I was burgled, they had the good sense to leave it behind. I had one of these and it was very good indeed. Bo, do you want to clarify the above two statements? Which lenses are you referring to? (I can't believe that the first comment is about the A 35-105/3.5.) Fred
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Quoting Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I spotted one of these at a local auction (ends February 12th), which normally won't go too high (limited amount of potential buyers). Rather rare, isn't it? Any comments on the performance of this lens is greatly appreciated, please. It's a very nice focal length for portraits on the D, isn't it (equivalent to 52-202mm on 135 film)? BTW: This guy is also selling a Tokina 80-200 F 4.5. I sold one of these recently. Since I already owned a F 70-210mm, I didn't keep it. BTW: It's an excellent performer, utilizing a macro function. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk New guy here, I have this lens have given it what i think is a good work out. when i got it i tested it my vivitar series 1 28-105 f2.8. Who won ? well i sold the vivitar never looked back!,good stuff! BTW, I ALSO OWN THE A 35-70,F4.0 THE A 80-210,F4.0, also good stuff!
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Jens if I had to give an award to the three best A zooms here's what I'd pick: A 35-105/3.5 A 70-210/4 A 35-70/4 I agree with Don here, Jens, although I think I'd add the A 70-210/4 to this list. To be relevant to your inquiry, though, Jens, the A 35-105/3.5 definitely belongs on a list of the best Pentax manual focus zooms. Fred
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
On 2/6/06, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry - it's the 3.5 35-105mm, naturally!!! Excellent lens. Only three beefs I have with it: 1. It's on the heavy side. On my super program, it makes the camera nose-heavy without the winder on it as a grip. If you're using it in a kit w/ a similarly-sized 80-200, not a problem. 2. Specular highlights tend to flare. I first noticed this in chrome trim on a car. I can point to pictures to demonstrate. Probably due to the large number of glass elements in the lens. 3. The Pentax hood for it is pretty close to useless. Find an aftermarket metal hood (67mm), use your hands, or improvise something else if you need a hood. -Mat
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
I had one of these and it was the worst Pentax lens I ever owned. It was so bad that when I was burgled, they had the good sense to leave it behind. I had one of these and it was very good indeed. Bo, do you want to clarify the above two statements? Which lenses are you referring to? (I can't believe that the first comment is about the A 35-105/3.5.) Oops - make that Bob, not Bo - sheepish_grin. Sorry, Bob. Fred
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Don Sanderson pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 12:56 AM Subject: Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please Jens if I had to give an award to the three best A zooms here's what I'd pick: A 35-105/3.5 A 70-210/4 A 35-70/4 I agree with Don here, Jens, although I think I'd add the A 70-210/4 to this list. You want two simultanous A 70-210/4:s? g Lasse To be relevant to your inquiry, though, Jens, the A 35-105/3.5 definitely belongs on a list of the best Pentax manual focus zooms. Fred
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
On Feb 6, 2006, at 16:56, Fred wrote: Jens if I had to give an award to the three best A zooms here's what I'd pick: A 35-105/3.5 A 70-210/4 A 35-70/4 I missed Don's original post but I just have to chime in here that I purchased the A35-70/4 from Godfrey not too long ago (he sold it for barely more than a song!) and I've really grown to love it. Has all of the appeal (imagewise) of my A primes, but the flexibility of a zoom. It's my main lens much of the time when I don't need a wide angle. -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org
RE: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
I was referring to the A 35-135/3.5-5.6 - however, that was later clarified. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 February 2006 22:48 To: Bob W Subject: Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please I had one of these and it was the worst Pentax lens I ever owned. It was so bad that when I was burgled, they had the good sense to leave it behind. I had one of these and it was very good indeed. Bo, do you want to clarify the above two statements? Which lenses are you referring to? (I can't believe that the first comment is about the A 35-105/3.5.) Fred
RE: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Bo, do you want to clarify the above two statements? Which lenses are you referring to? (I can't believe that the first comment is about the A 35-105/3.5.) Oops - make that Bob, not Bo - sheepish_grin. Sorry, Bob. Fred Don't worry, Fred. Bo knows. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
2. Specular highlights tend to flare. I first noticed this in chrome trim on a car. I can point to pictures to demonstrate. Probably due to the large number of glass elements in the lens. There are ~so~ many glass to air surfaces in one of these that it's a little more likely to flare than a more sensible prime lens. (The A 28-135/4 is similar in this regard, I'd say.) I even have a specular highlight starburst on a whale while using an A 35-105/3.5 - http://plg.komkon.org/a35-105_35/fl1.html . Ordinarily, I wouldn't be using such a lens for shooting whales, but I had just gotten the lens and was anxious to try it out, and I did have to work that day (whale watching), and I did have a very cooperative whale on one trip that day at a time that I happened to have that lens on one of the two bodies I was using. Fred
Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
Jens if I had to give an award to the three best A zooms here's what I'd pick: A 35-105/3.5 A 70-210/4 A 35-70/4 I agree with Don here, Jens, although I think I'd add the A 70-210/4 to this list. You want two simultanous A 70-210/4:s? groan Oops - in the original post by Don, he listed those three, and then immediately mentioned me liking the 28-135/4. In my (feeble) mind, I sort of elevated (I guess) the 28-135/4 into his list, and then decided that the A 70-210/4 should also (g) be on his list. I think I'd be a lot safer for everybody if I were merely a lurker - g. Fred
RE: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please
What? And leave all the silly mistakes up to me?? ;-) Don -Original Message- From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 5:29 PM To: Lasse Karlsson Subject: Re: SMC Pentax-A 3.5 35-135mm - comments, please Jens if I had to give an award to the three best A zooms here's what I'd pick: A 35-105/3.5 A 70-210/4 A 35-70/4 I agree with Don here, Jens, although I think I'd add the A 70-210/4 to this list. You want two simultanous A 70-210/4:s? groan Oops - in the original post by Don, he listed those three, and then immediately mentioned me liking the 28-135/4. In my (feeble) mind, I sort of elevated (I guess) the 28-135/4 into his list, and then decided that the A 70-210/4 should also (g) be on his list. I think I'd be a lot safer for everybody if I were merely a lurker - g. Fred
