Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
For those who aren't already aware, the SMC-K 135mm f2.5 is the same optical configuration as the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar (version 2), which you can identify by the tattoo on the back of their neck. Sorry, slipped into a Monty Python skit there. V2 identified by 43812 on the A/M switch. Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: What would you do with a 50 1.2
What would you do with a 50 1.2? John I carry it in my bag, always. I have the M version, though. I have no idea how that compares to the A but it is a solid metal and glass antithesis to the megapixel and sharpness cult most people belong to. I put it on my K-5 every now and then to admire the view, to appreciate the shallow DOF, maybe even (god forbid) to make a blurry picture or two. It would be my one and only lens if only I could persuade my family that pictures consisting of 99.9% blur and 0.1% of what seems somewhat less blurry are all the rage. I love its character and the way it makes me feel. I would be hard-pressed to produce a handful decent pictures that I've taken with this lens and if pictures - the end result - were more important to me than the actual picture taking process - the journey - I would probably never use it again. kris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2/9/2012 2:02 PM, John Celio wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John I would cherish the thing, personally. I've been in love with my K 50/1.4 since I got it. I've been hoping to stumble upon a 50/1.2 in a bargain bin or find one with cosmetic flaws that someone would be willing to let go of on the cheap. But alas, it ain't happenin'. Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? Maybe a 3rd-party manufactured gem that's a total steal? I really care far less about auto-focus and aperture contacts than I do about the optics themselves. Give me a sharp lens with nice bokeh, in ugly condition or otherwise -- as long as I can take nice photos with it, I'm happy. -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
The K 35mm f3.5, (a bitch to focus in dim light even on the view finders it was designed for), extremely sharp with creamy bokeh. The K version of the 135mm f3.5 very sharp a bit bulky, (twice as long as the M version), but available for less than 50 bucks. The M200mm f4.0 also a bargain but also a very good lens. These were all from Pentax's second or third tier of lenses but Pentax generally saved money on speed but optical quality was always top notch. On 2/13/2012 8:01 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: On 2/9/2012 2:02 PM, John Celio wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John I would cherish the thing, personally. I've been in love with my K 50/1.4 since I got it. I've been hoping to stumble upon a 50/1.2 in a bargain bin or find one with cosmetic flaws that someone would be willing to let go of on the cheap. But alas, it ain't happenin'. Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? Maybe a 3rd-party manufactured gem that's a total steal? I really care far less about auto-focus and aperture contacts than I do about the optics themselves. Give me a sharp lens with nice bokeh, in ugly condition or otherwise -- as long as I can take nice photos with it, I'm happy. -- Walt -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 08:59:50 -0500 P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: The K 35mm f3.5, (a bitch to focus in dim light even on the view finders it was designed for), extremely sharp with creamy bokeh. The K version of the 135mm f3.5 very sharp a bit bulky, (twice as long as the M version), but available for less than 50 bucks. The M200mm f4.0 also a bargain but also a very good lens. These were all from Pentax's second or third tier of lenses but Pentax generally saved money on speed but optical quality was always top notch. PJ, any idea what's the k135/2.5 is like? just came across one in very good shape for about $50. i like k lenses so will most probably buy it anyway but it'd be nice to know :) thanks, subash -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Thanks, P.J. I've put them all in a text file and will keep an eye out for them. That 35/3.5 sounds especially appealing, focusing difficulty notwithstanding. I don't have anything in that focal length, and I'm not too crazy about the Takumar 28/2.8 I got awhile back, so I could use something good under 50mm. But I'll be on the lookout for all of 'em. -- Walt On 2/13/2012 7:59 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: The K 35mm f3.5, (a bitch to focus in dim light even on the view finders it was designed for), extremely sharp with creamy bokeh. The K version of the 135mm f3.5 very sharp a bit bulky, (twice as long as the M version), but available for less than 50 bucks. The M200mm f4.0 also a bargain but also a very good lens. These were all from Pentax's second or third tier of lenses but Pentax generally saved money on speed but optical quality was always top notch. On 2/13/2012 8:01 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: On 2/9/2012 2:02 PM, John Celio wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John I would cherish the thing, personally. I've been in love with my K 50/1.4 since I got it. I've been hoping to stumble upon a 50/1.2 in a bargain bin or find one with cosmetic flaws that someone would be willing to let go of on the cheap. But alas, it ain't happenin'. Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? Maybe a 3rd-party manufactured gem that's a total steal? I really care far less about auto-focus and aperture contacts than I do about the optics themselves. Give me a sharp lens with nice bokeh, in ugly condition or otherwise -- as long as I can take nice photos with it, I'm happy. -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Subash, The Takumar K 135/2.5 is a bargain grade lens with single coatings. I found it a fairly poor performer until stopped down to about f/8. The SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5 is the one to look for. I have the SMC Takumar 135/3.5 M42 mount lens, it is a terrific performer too. G On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Subash pdml.l...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 08:59:50 -0500 P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: The K 35mm f3.5, (a bitch to focus in dim light even on the view finders it was designed for), extremely sharp with creamy bokeh. The K version of the 135mm f3.5 very sharp a bit bulky, (twice as long as the M version), but available for less than 50 bucks. The M200mm f4.0 also a bargain but also a very good lens. These were all from Pentax's second or third tier of lenses but Pentax generally saved money on speed but optical quality was always top notch. PJ, any idea what's the k135/2.5 is like? just came across one in very good shape for about $50. i like k lenses so will most probably buy it anyway but it'd be nice to know :) thanks, subash -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:25:36 -0800 Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: The Takumar K 135/2.5 is a bargain grade lens with single coatings. I found it a fairly poor performer until stopped down to about f/8. The SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5 is the one to look for. I have the SMC Takumar 135/3.5 M42 mount lens, it is a terrific performer too. thanks Godfrey. the one i saw is not the Takumar. it is a SMC-K 135/2.5. is it optically same (as poor as) the Takumar? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 13 February 2012 14:30, Subash pdml.l...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:25:36 -0800 Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: The Takumar K 135/2.5 is a bargain grade lens with single coatings. I found it a fairly poor performer until stopped down to about f/8. The SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5 is the one to look for. I have the SMC Takumar 135/3.5 M42 mount lens, it is a terrific performer too. thanks Godfrey. the one i saw is not the Takumar. it is a SMC-K 135/2.5. is it optically same (as poor as) the Takumar? No; different formulae. the Bayonet Takumar is 4 elements / 4 groups http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_non-SMC/index.html and the SMC Pentax 1:2.5/135 is 6 elements / 6 groups http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/tele/index.html -- Eric -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Subash pdml.l...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:25:36 -0800 Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: The Takumar K 135/2.5 is a bargain grade lens with single coatings. I found it a fairly poor performer until stopped down to about f/8. The SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5 is the one to look for. I have the SMC Takumar 135/3.5 M42 mount lens, it is a terrific performer too. thanks Godfrey. the one i saw is not the Takumar. it is a SMC-K 135/2.5. is it optically same (as poor as) the Takumar? I don't know, I've not used that lens. I know the two lenses, the single coated takumar and the multicoated K 135s, are often confused. I'd hold out for the M series 135/3.5 however. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Subash, The K135/2.5 is a poor man's A*135/1.8. It's the best of the 135's (w/o including the A*135/1.8). Long ago I ran a test on 135's on film. Don't bother with the Takumar 135/2.5 (multicolored distance scale), It is the weakest by far. Regards, Bob S. On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Subash pdml.l...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 08:59:50 -0500 P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: The K 35mm f3.5, (a bitch to focus in dim light even on the view finders it was designed for), extremely sharp with creamy bokeh. The K version of the 135mm f3.5 very sharp a bit bulky, (twice as long as the M version), but available for less than 50 bucks. The M200mm f4.0 also a bargain but also a very good lens. These were all from Pentax's second or third tier of lenses but Pentax generally saved money on speed but optical quality was always top notch. PJ, any idea what's the k135/2.5 is like? just came across one in very good shape for about $50. i like k lenses so will most probably buy it anyway but it'd be nice to know :) thanks, subash -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
on 2012-02-13 06:01 Walt Gilbert wrote Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? not completely sure how to parse your question, but there are certainly bargains on old equipment, essentially, in capitalist terms, you look for inefficiencies in the market and lubricate them; it takes some patience and a nose for quality; among the lenses i use the most, my Macro-Takumar 50/4, SMC A 50/1.7, and Sigma EX Macro 105/2.8 (which i mostly manual focus) were all edge-market finds, and the latter at $100 cost more than the other two together; you won't find them at the prices i paid on eBay, but you might on craigslist, a thrift store or a yard sale -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: What would you do with a 50 1.2
the smc k135/2.5 ( not the takumar 135/2.5) is a killer sharp lens. jco -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Subash Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 9:17 AM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 08:59:50 -0500 P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: The K 35mm f3.5, (a bitch to focus in dim light even on the view finders it was designed for), extremely sharp with creamy bokeh. The K version of the 135mm f3.5 very sharp a bit bulky, (twice as long as the M version), but available for less than 50 bucks. The M200mm f4.0 also a bargain but also a very good lens. These were all from Pentax's second or third tier of lenses but Pentax generally saved money on speed but optical quality was always top notch. PJ, any idea what's the k135/2.5 is like? just came across one in very good shape for about $50. i like k lenses so will most probably buy it anyway but it'd be nice to know :) thanks, subash -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:36:46 -0500 JC OCONNELL hifis...@gate.net wrote: the smc k135/2.5 ( not the takumar 135/2.5) is a killer sharp lens. thanks, JCO (and Bob and Eric). the lens is in the bag :) subash -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2/13/2012 10:35 AM, steve harley wrote: on 2012-02-13 06:01 Walt Gilbert wrote Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? not completely sure how to parse your question, but there are certainly bargains on old equipment, essentially, in capitalist terms, you look for inefficiencies in the market and lubricate them; it takes some patience and a nose for quality; among the lenses i use the most, my Macro-Takumar 50/4, SMC A 50/1.7, and Sigma EX Macro 105/2.8 (which i mostly manual focus) were all edge-market finds, and the latter at $100 cost more than the other two together; you won't find them at the prices i paid on eBay, but you might on craigslist, a thrift store or a yard sale I just found an A 50/1.7 for $45. I'm not positive, but if I'm not mistaken, they've been going for a bit more than that lately on eBay. Of course, if I had it, it would be my 3rd 50mm prime lens between my K 50/1.4 and my M 50/2. Is the A 50/1.7 good enough to justify having yet another 50mm at that price? -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
on 2012-02-13 09:46 Walt Gilbert wrote I just found an A 50/1.7 for $45. I'm not positive, but if I'm not mistaken, they've been going for a bit more than that lately on eBay. yeah, that's right Of course, if I had it, it would be my 3rd 50mm prime lens between my K 50/1.4 and my M 50/2. Is the A 50/1.7 good enough to justify having yet another 50mm at that price? depends how much you value the A setting; between my A 50/1.7 and my M 50/1.4 the former is on the camera half the time and the latter hasn't been on the camera in months (it may go on the GH1 because auto-aperture doesn't make a difference when adapted to M 4/3) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2/13/2012 11:30 AM, steve harley wrote: on 2012-02-13 09:46 Walt Gilbert wrote I just found an A 50/1.7 for $45. I'm not positive, but if I'm not mistaken, they've been going for a bit more than that lately on eBay. yeah, that's right Of course, if I had it, it would be my 3rd 50mm prime lens between my K 50/1.4 and my M 50/2. Is the A 50/1.7 good enough to justify having yet another 50mm at that price? depends how much you value the A setting; between my A 50/1.7 and my M 50/1.4 the former is on the camera half the time and the latter hasn't been on the camera in months (it may go on the GH1 because auto-aperture doesn't make a difference when adapted to M 4/3) Well, as much as I couldn't afford to, I went ahead and bought the thing. I guess I won't know how much I value having the A setting on it until I use it. I'm guessing I'll like it, though, since I won't have to remember to stop down between shots with it. That'll be nice. -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
The 1.7 50's are the sharpest of the three designs and have the flattest field of focus, not as flat as a dedicated copy lens, but they're the recommended lens for use with the Pentax Auto bellows, that is if you can't find one of the dedicated bellows lenses of course. On 2/13/2012 11:46 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: On 2/13/2012 10:35 AM, steve harley wrote: on 2012-02-13 06:01 Walt Gilbert wrote Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? not completely sure how to parse your question, but there are certainly bargains on old equipment, essentially, in capitalist terms, you look for inefficiencies in the market and lubricate them; it takes some patience and a nose for quality; among the lenses i use the most, my Macro-Takumar 50/4, SMC A 50/1.7, and Sigma EX Macro 105/2.8 (which i mostly manual focus) were all edge-market finds, and the latter at $100 cost more than the other two together; you won't find them at the prices i paid on eBay, but you might on craigslist, a thrift store or a yard sale I just found an A 50/1.7 for $45. I'm not positive, but if I'm not mistaken, they've been going for a bit more than that lately on eBay. Of course, if I had it, it would be my 3rd 50mm prime lens between my K 50/1.4 and my M 50/2. Is the A 50/1.7 good enough to justify having yet another 50mm at that price? -- Walt -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: What would you do with a 50 1.2
50mm lenses are way too short to use on bellows, they only allow super high magnifications, general purpose macro is out of the question with them, thats why most dedication bellows lenses are 100mm not 50mm. jco -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:22 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 The 1.7 50's are the sharpest of the three designs and have the flattest field of focus, not as flat as a dedicated copy lens, but they're the recommended lens for use with the Pentax Auto bellows, that is if you can't find one of the dedicated bellows lenses of course. On 2/13/2012 11:46 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: On 2/13/2012 10:35 AM, steve harley wrote: on 2012-02-13 06:01 Walt Gilbert wrote Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? not completely sure how to parse your question, but there are certainly bargains on old equipment, essentially, in capitalist terms, you look for inefficiencies in the market and lubricate them; it takes some patience and a nose for quality; among the lenses i use the most, my Macro-Takumar 50/4, SMC A 50/1.7, and Sigma EX Macro 105/2.8 (which i mostly manual focus) were all edge-market finds, and the latter at $100 cost more than the other two together; you won't find them at the prices i paid on eBay, but you might on craigslist, a thrift store or a yard sale I just found an A 50/1.7 for $45. I'm not positive, but if I'm not mistaken, they've been going for a bit more than that lately on eBay. Of course, if I had it, it would be my 3rd 50mm prime lens between my K 50/1.4 and my M 50/2. Is the A 50/1.7 good enough to justify having yet another 50mm at that price? -- Walt -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
I have an auto bellows M in the original box, /you/ can argue with the instruction booklet. On 2/13/2012 1:45 PM, JC OCONNELL wrote: 50mm lenses are way too short to use on bellows, they only allow super high magnifications, general purpose macro is out of the question with them, thats why most dedication bellows lenses are 100mm not 50mm. jco -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:22 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 The 1.7 50's are the sharpest of the three designs and have the flattest field of focus, not as flat as a dedicated copy lens, but they're the recommended lens for use with the Pentax Auto bellows, that is if you can't find one of the dedicated bellows lenses of course. On 2/13/2012 11:46 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: On 2/13/2012 10:35 AM, steve harley wrote: on 2012-02-13 06:01 Walt Gilbert wrote Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? not completely sure how to parse your question, but there are certainly bargains on old equipment, essentially, in capitalist terms, you look for inefficiencies in the market and lubricate them; it takes some patience and a nose for quality; among the lenses i use the most, my Macro-Takumar 50/4, SMC A 50/1.7, and Sigma EX Macro 105/2.8 (which i mostly manual focus) were all edge-market finds, and the latter at $100 cost more than the other two together; you won't find them at the prices i paid on eBay, but you might on craigslist, a thrift store or a yard sale I just found an A 50/1.7 for $45. I'm not positive, but if I'm not mistaken, they've been going for a bit more than that lately on eBay. Of course, if I had it, it would be my 3rd 50mm prime lens between my K 50/1.4 and my M 50/2. Is the A 50/1.7 good enough to justify having yet another 50mm at that price? -- Walt -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
I'll take all the A50 f1.7s that I can get for $45, all day long. Finding one for that price is like finding a $50 bill on the ground. Whether the aperture ring turns smoothly when you get it, is a whole 'nuther question. Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2/13/2012 2:00 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I'll take all the A50 f1.7s that I can get for $45, all day long. Finding one for that price is like finding a $50 bill on the ground. Whether the aperture ring turns smoothly when you get it, is a whole 'nuther question. Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska That's one of the things I was concerned about, but they had a 14-day return policy, so I figured it was worth a shot. The seller had a pretty extensive history just barely under 99% positive reviews, so it seemed likely if there were anything wrong with the lens, it would've been noted. But . . . we shall see, won't we? -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Walt Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: On 2/13/2012 2:00 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I'll take all the A50 f1.7s that I can get for $45, all day long. Finding one for that price is like finding a $50 bill on the ground. Whether the aperture ring turns smoothly when you get it, is a whole 'nuther question. That's one of the things I was concerned about, but they had a 14-day return policy, so I figured it was worth a shot. The seller had a pretty extensive history just barely under 99% positive reviews, so it seemed likely if there were anything wrong with the lens, it would've been noted. But . . . we shall see, won't we? The most common problem with the A50/1.7 is the stuck/notchy aperture ring. If that's OK you'll be golden. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: The most common problem with the A50/1.7 is the stuck/notchy aperture ring. If that's OK you'll be golden. Yes. I had two of them. Pentax cheapened the aperture mechanism on the A50/1.7 by using a plastic aperture ring. Inside, there is a little springy tang that falls into notches and adjusts the throw of the iris actuating mechanism. This steel tang is fastened to the plastic by two heat-expanded plastic nubbins. Over time, it tends to work loose and slip off, which causes the ring to jam. My camera tech took the ring off, pulled out the fallen spring tang, then re-fixed it in place with a little screw and some glue. Good as new, cost me $25. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: What would you do with a 50 1.2
try shooting someething the size of say, a camera, with a 50mm on a bellows, you cant. - J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 2:51 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 I have an auto bellows M in the original box, /you/ can argue with the instruction booklet. On 2/13/2012 1:45 PM, JC OCONNELL wrote: 50mm lenses are way too short to use on bellows, they only allow super high magnifications, general purpose macro is out of the question with them, thats why most dedication bellows lenses are 100mm not 50mm. jco -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:22 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 The 1.7 50's are the sharpest of the three designs and have the flattest field of focus, not as flat as a dedicated copy lens, but they're the recommended lens for use with the Pentax Auto bellows, that is if you can't find one of the dedicated bellows lenses of course. On 2/13/2012 11:46 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: On 2/13/2012 10:35 AM, steve harley wrote: on 2012-02-13 06:01 Walt Gilbert wrote Which raises a question: Are there any really stellar manual primes that go for paltry sums along the lines of the M 50/2? not completely sure how to parse your question, but there are certainly bargains on old equipment, essentially, in capitalist terms, you look for inefficiencies in the market and lubricate them; it takes some patience and a nose for quality; among the lenses i use the most, my Macro-Takumar 50/4, SMC A 50/1.7, and Sigma EX Macro 105/2.8 (which i mostly manual focus) were all edge-market finds, and the latter at $100 cost more than the other two together; you won't find them at the prices i paid on eBay, but you might on craigslist, a thrift store or a yard sale I just found an A 50/1.7 for $45. I'm not positive, but if I'm not mistaken, they've been going for a bit more than that lately on eBay. Of course, if I had it, it would be my 3rd 50mm prime lens between my K 50/1.4 and my M 50/2. Is the A 50/1.7 good enough to justify having yet another 50mm at that price? -- Walt -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2/13/2012 8:24 PM, JC OCONNELL wrote: try shooting someething the size of say, a camera, with a 50mm on a bellows, you cant. I shoot snow crystals with a 50mm on a bellows, reverse mounted lens preferred. Those crystals are a lot smaller than a camera. Who'd want to take a macro picture of a camera? On 2/13/2012 1:45 PM, JC OCONNELL wrote: 50mm lenses are way too short to use on bellows, they only allow super high magnifications, general purpose macro is out of the question with them, thats why most dedication bellows lenses are 100mm not 50mm. You are right on that, but there is no need to use bellows for any general purpose macro shots. -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:22 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 The 1.7 50's are the sharpest of the three designs and have the flattest field of focus, not as flat as a dedicated copy lens, but they're the recommended lens for use with the Pentax Auto bellows, that is if you can't find one of the dedicated bellows lenses of course. I've used an SMC M50 1.7 for snow crystals and it has been good, better than my sample of the A 50 1.4 and better then the M 50 F2. But it was not as good (by far) as the M 50mm f4 macro. The SIgma EX 50mm f2.8 is also better. The M 50 f4 is probably the best macro lens I've used for extreme magnification, but it is dark and hard to focus on a foot or so of extension. - MCC -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Feb 13, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Subash wrote: On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:25:36 -0800 Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: The Takumar K 135/2.5 is a bargain grade lens with single coatings. I found it a fairly poor performer until stopped down to about f/8. The SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5 is the one to look for. I have the SMC Takumar 135/3.5 M42 mount lens, it is a terrific performer too. thanks Godfrey. the one i saw is not the Takumar. it is a SMC-K 135/2.5. is it optically same (as poor as) the Takumar? No, the SMC-K 135/2.5 has nothing in common with the k-mount takumar 135/2.5. The SMC version is very good, even wide open. I sold mine for over $200, a couple of years ago. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: What would you do with a 50 1.2
nothing wrong with high magnification macro, but its not general purpose macro which includes both high and medium and lower magnification work. - J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark C Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:38 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 On 2/13/2012 8:24 PM, JC OCONNELL wrote: try shooting someething the size of say, a camera, with a 50mm on a bellows, you cant. I shoot snow crystals with a 50mm on a bellows, reverse mounted lens preferred. Those crystals are a lot smaller than a camera. Who'd want to take a macro picture of a camera? On 2/13/2012 1:45 PM, JC OCONNELL wrote: 50mm lenses are way too short to use on bellows, they only allow super high magnifications, general purpose macro is out of the question with them, thats why most dedication bellows lenses are 100mm not 50mm. You are right on that, but there is no need to use bellows for any general purpose macro shots. -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:22 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 The 1.7 50's are the sharpest of the three designs and have the flattest field of focus, not as flat as a dedicated copy lens, but they're the recommended lens for use with the Pentax Auto bellows, that is if you can't find one of the dedicated bellows lenses of course. I've used an SMC M50 1.7 for snow crystals and it has been good, better than my sample of the A 50 1.4 and better then the M 50 F2. But it was not as good (by far) as the M 50mm f4 macro. The SIgma EX 50mm f2.8 is also better. The M 50 f4 is probably the best macro lens I've used for extreme magnification, but it is dark and hard to focus on a foot or so of extension. - MCC -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Feb 14, 2012, at 3:20 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: I've put them all in a text file and will keep an eye out for them. That 35/3.5 sounds especially appealing, focusing difficulty notwithstanding. I don't have anything in that focal length, and I'm not too crazy about the Takumar 28/2.8 I got awhile back, so I could use something good under 50mm. But I'll be on the lookout for all of 'em. The SMCP 35/3.5 was my first thought when I saw your question. I never found it difficult to focus with a microprism screen but I've always used mine in strong light. I used to have a Takumar-A 28/2.8 and it was quite soft. IIRC the Takumar lenses with K mount were a budget line. Now I'm getting all nostalgic for my film cameras and manual focus lenses. Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2/13/2012 10:32 PM, David Mann wrote: On Feb 14, 2012, at 3:20 AM, Walt Gilbert wrote: I've put them all in a text file and will keep an eye out for them. That 35/3.5 sounds especially appealing, focusing difficulty notwithstanding. I don't have anything in that focal length, and I'm not too crazy about the Takumar 28/2.8 I got awhile back, so I could use something good under 50mm. But I'll be on the lookout for all of 'em. The SMCP 35/3.5 was my first thought when I saw your question. I never found it difficult to focus with a microprism screen but I've always used mine in strong light. I used to have a Takumar-A 28/2.8 and it was quite soft. IIRC the Takumar lenses with K mount were a budget line. Now I'm getting all nostalgic for my film cameras and manual focus lenses. Dave Looks like word has gotten out about that K 35/3.5 as it's now going for about $100 (on eBay, at least). I saw one of the M 200/4's at KEH in the BGN lenses for $40 -- but with shipping, it was a little more than the A 50/1.7. So, I opted to add another 50mm to my collection. I do like that focal length -- and shooting with manual focus primes in general. They're challenging, but when you get it right, the results can be glorious. The Tak 28/2.8 struck me as soft, too. And I'm really not crazy about the color it produces. I don't even bother taking it with me. Fortunately, I only paid about $30 for it at the time. -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2012-02-13 9:17, Subash wrote: PJ, any idea what's the k135/2.5 is like? just came across one in very good shape for about $50. i like k lenses so will most probably buy it anyway but it'd be nice to know :) It's frackin' great! I haven't used mine in a while, but I recall it as having a very mellow bokeh and working particularly well in close (for a 135). -- Doug Lefty Franklin NutDriver Racing http://NutDriver.org Facebook NutDriver Racing Sponsored by Murphy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2012-02-13 11:06, Bob Sullivan wrote: Subash, The K135/2.5 is a poor man's A*135/1.8. It's the best of the 135's (w/o including the A*135/1.8). That's kinda like saying that gold is a poor man's platinum. -- Doug Lefty Franklin NutDriver Racing http://NutDriver.org Facebook NutDriver Racing Sponsored by Murphy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2012-02-13 11:36, JC OCONNELL wrote: the smc k135/2.5 ( not the takumar 135/2.5) is a killer sharp lens. I have both, and agree wholeheartedly. The SMC-K 135/2.5 will cut you, it's so sharp. Like the FA* 200/2.8 (oh God I used to love eBay). -- Doug Lefty Franklin NutDriver Racing http://NutDriver.org Facebook NutDriver Racing Sponsored by Murphy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Feb 14, 2012, at 6:42 PM, Doug Franklin wrote: I have both, and agree wholeheartedly. The SMC-K 135/2.5 will cut you, it's so sharp. Like the FA* 200/2.8 (oh God I used to love eBay). Yes that FA*200 is one nice piece of glass. It'd be even better with mind-reading AF. I was actually feeling a bit frustrated taking photos with that lens on Saturday. About a year ago I narrowly missed the opportunity for a good deal on a new DA*50-135. Either that or a good 80-200 f/2.8 would have been very useful. Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 9/2/12, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: What would you do with a 50 1.2? Grind the aperture coupler off the back and use it as a test bed for an EOS mount. Let it sit quietly for a couple of years, forsaken by an A*85/1.4 and a K15/3.5 following as hybrids. Pick up a few years later to raid for screws Sit again. Do some R+D on taking apart completely to clean, leave in parts for another couple of years. Cannibalize totally to assist other lenses and chuck the rest away except for the largest objective which now sits on my desk as a brilliant (and fast) magnifier. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Could you be more specific please? cheers, frank ;-) What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof. -- Christopher Hitchens --- Original Message --- From: Cotty cotty...@mac.com Sent: February 11, 2012 2/11/12 To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Subject: Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2 On 9/2/12, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: What would you do with a 50 1.2? Grind the aperture coupler off the back and use it as a test bed for an EOS mount. Let it sit quietly for a couple of years, forsaken by an A*85/1.4 and a K15/3.5 following as hybrids. Pick up a few years later to raid for screws Sit again. Do some R+D on taking apart completely to clean, leave in parts for another couple of years. Cannibalize totally to assist other lenses and chuck the rest away except for the largest objective which now sits on my desk as a brilliant (and fast) magnifier. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Even I thought that my penny dreadful descriptions of Cotty's lens experiments a bit over the top, but apparently I was wrong. On 2/11/2012 6:38 AM, Cotty wrote: On 9/2/12, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: What would you do with a 50 1.2? Grind the aperture coupler off the back and use it as a test bed for an EOS mount. Let it sit quietly for a couple of years, forsaken by an A*85/1.4 and a K15/3.5 following as hybrids. Pick up a few years later to raid for screws Sit again. Do some R+D on taking apart completely to clean, leave in parts for another couple of years. Cannibalize totally to assist other lenses and chuck the rest away except for the largest objective which now sits on my desk as a brilliant (and fast) magnifier. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: What would you do with a 50 1.2
-Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Even I thought that my penny dreadful descriptions of Cotty's lens experiments a bit over the top, but apparently I was wrong. Here he is relaxing at home: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJIeOmNN60M B On 2/11/2012 6:38 AM, Cotty wrote: On 9/2/12, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: What would you do with a 50 1.2? Grind the aperture coupler off the back and use it as a test bed for an EOS mount. Let it sit quietly for a couple of years, forsaken by an A*85/1.4 and a K15/3.5 following as hybrids. Pick up a few years later to raid for screws Sit again. Do some R+D on taking apart completely to clean, leave in parts for another couple of years. Cannibalize totally to assist other lenses and chuck the rest away except for the largest objective which now sits on my desk as a brilliant (and fast) magnifier. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
I will name him George, and I will hug him and pet him and squeeze him ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: I will name him George, and I will hug him and pet him and squeeze him ... MARK! -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Wow. I can even hear the voice in my head. On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:53 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: I will name him George, and I will hug him and pet him and squeeze him ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Reminds me of One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish by Dr Seuss: Look what we found in the park in the dark We will take him home. We will call him Clark. We will feed him well. He will grow and grow. Will our mother like this? We don't know. On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: I will name him George, and I will hug him and pet him and squeeze him ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Through the wonders of the net: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JlVqfC8-UI On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Tim Bray tb...@textuality.com wrote: Reminds me of One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish by Dr Seuss: Look what we found in the park in the dark We will take him home. We will call him Clark. We will feed him well. He will grow and grow. Will our mother like this? We don't know. On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: I will name him George, and I will hug him and pet him and squeeze him ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:53 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: I will name him George, and I will hug him and pet him and squeeze him ... MARK! I don't think it's eligible. I cribbed it from a Bugs Bunny cartoon. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Had one (Pentax). Absolutely hated how soft it was wide open. Sold it to pay for other purchases. The market on these is Stupid High right now. If another one dropped into my lap, I'd probably do it again. Have a Canon FL 50mm f1.2 arriving tomorrow. It is a darn good lens according to the Test Reports, particularly if you are just using the center of the image circle. Plan to sell it to an NEX or GXR or 4/3 user. : ) Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:02 PM, John Celio neo.venator.com+p...@gmail.com wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
El 09/02/2012 21:02, John Celio escribió: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? I'd keep the lens and use it. I still regret having sold mine. I've had a bunch of 50mm. lenses, and the SMC-A 50mm. 1.2 has been the best by a wide margin. I don't mean the others I've had or still have (M 50mm. 1.4, A 1.7, F 1.7, DA 55mm. 1.4, Helios 44-K 58mm. 2.0) are bad, but the one I've liked the best is the A 1.2 Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Low-light portraits. But I wouldn't pay the premium that lens demands for the minimal advantage it offers over a 50/1.4. On Feb 9, 2012, at 3:02 PM, John Celio wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
What would you do with a 50 1.2? I'd keep the lens and use it. I still regret having sold mine. I've had a bunch of 50mm. lenses, and the SMC-A 50mm. 1.2 has been the best by a wide margin. I don't mean the others I've had or still have (M 50mm. 1.4, A 1.7, F 1.7, DA 55mm. 1.4, Helios 44-K 58mm. 2.0) are bad, but the one I've liked the best is the A 1.2 Maybe my copy needs service, but it's never seemed all that great to me. What do you like about it? John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
Sell it while it's worth good money and put the money toward the K-5 replacement. Seriously. If you have to ask, then it's probably not a lens your really use. On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:40 PM, John Celio neo.venator.com+p...@gmail.com wrote: What would you do with a 50 1.2? I'd keep the lens and use it. I still regret having sold mine. I've had a bunch of 50mm. lenses, and the SMC-A 50mm. 1.2 has been the best by a wide margin. I don't mean the others I've had or still have (M 50mm. 1.4, A 1.7, F 1.7, DA 55mm. 1.4, Helios 44-K 58mm. 2.0) are bad, but the one I've liked the best is the A 1.2 Maybe my copy needs service, but it's never seemed all that great to me. What do you like about it? John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
El 09/02/2012 22:40, John Celio escribió: What would you do with a 50 1.2? I'd keep the lens and use it. I still regret having sold mine. I've had a bunch of 50mm. lenses, and the SMC-A 50mm. 1.2 has been the best by a wide margin. I don't mean the others I've had or still have (M 50mm. 1.4, A 1.7, F 1.7, DA 55mm. 1.4, Helios 44-K 58mm. 2.0) are bad, but the one I've liked the best is the A 1.2 Maybe my copy needs service, but it's never seemed all that great to me. What do you like about it? John I think it is better wide open than the M 50mm 1.4, which is a very good lens. It also betters it at mid apertures, and, in my view, has a more pleasant colour rendition. The M is a bit in the cold side, the F 50mm 1.7 is very sharp but has a slightly hotter colour rendition, while the A 1.2 is more neutral for my eye. But at the insanely high prices the A 50mm 1.2 is being sold for nowadays, perhaps it is a good time to sell it if you have no use for the lens and put that money towards other photo equipment you want or need more. Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
On 2/9/2012 15:02, John Celio wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John Use it for low light situations when either the subject is far enough away that everything would be sharp anyway, or close-ups for very selective DOF. ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
I'd use it for my low light photography. I may need to use live view to focus it. It would be very interesting to use it with a noughty one, wigh should have sufficient low light sensitivity and a fully functional live view. John Celio neo.venator.com+p...@gmail.com wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: What would you do with a 50 1.2
I'd sell it and put the money toward a lens that I knew I wanted. That's what I did with my old Rikenon 55mm f1.2. Gorgeous lens and I hated to part with it just because it was so solid, bright, and absolutely killer on the LX. That dang lens almost turned me into a ... COLLECTOR! Ye gods... If you are asking what kind of project I'd do with an f1.2 I'd do something requiring shallow DOF and low light - but that extra half stop (compared to a 1.4 lens) don't get you much of either and there's not much that you *need* a 1.2 to do since from 1.4 on it is redundant with much more common lenses. Mark On 2/9/2012 3:02 PM, John Celio wrote: I have an A 50mm 1.2 sitting around collecting dust. I don't have good enough vision to focus manually with my K-5, and I don't trust the focus indicator, so I rarely use the lens. After yesterday's discussions of future lenses from Pentax and my discovery of how much it goes for on eBay, I'm considering selling it to pay for future purchases. I'd like to put it to work a little before I make up my mind, but am running short on inspiration lately, so I thought I'd post an informal survey: What would you do with a 50 1.2? John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
