Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
My impression is that most who have tried Velvia 100F are dissapointed as it has neither the sharpness or the color palette of the original Velvia. It is probably a good film anyway but apparently doesn't meet the expectations the Velvia name bring. It seems like the most important design parametres for slide film in this digital age is small grain and the ability to scan well. And the test in Japan CAPA magazine also indicates the 100F doesn't have the characterictis of the 50. In fact, some of the pics shown were quite differemnt in colour rendition. They aren't as vivid as the original. regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
I've even noticed how differnt lenses may perform in response to various films. Provia F in particular being a high resolution/low accutance film. It simply doesn't mate well with all lenses! Pål First time I've heard this. I switched lately from Velvia to Provia F because a lot on this list said it scanned better since Velvia is more color saturated. And that does appear to be true based on my recent scanning experience. But what does low accutance mean? Huh? Marnie aka Doe
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
First time I've heard this. I switched lately from Velvia to Provia F because a lot on this list said it scanned better since Velvia is more color saturated. And that does appear to be true based on my recent scanning experience. I have found the Provia 100F is not as contrasty as other slides, but it sure scans beautifully. regards, Alan Chan _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
It's not so much that they prefer to use cheap lenses, more that: 1)they've never used an full metal bodied lens so they don't know better, and 2)they'd rather pay less than more for the camera / lens package. Give them time. Let them first discover Pentax, then lure them towards the quality stuff, maybe even the quality retro stuff (and then they'd need to buy ~another~ camera with improved compatibility, wouldn't they?). regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Rüdiger Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Pål Jensen Perhaps this is a factor in the compatibility issues of the *istD? Perhaps K and particularly M lenses are not that well suited for digital? So, you think that the entry level lenses like the FAJ 18-35, FAJ 28-80 and the FAJ 70-300 which are specialy made for the entry level *istD are better then good the old lenses like the K 2/35, K 1.8/85 or K 2.5/135. I always read in the PDML that the user of the entry level *istD prefer this new cheep plastic mount lenses, and therefore Pentax protect them for using the the old stuff. Pentax made the software in a way, that you can not use the old lenses, which were for advanced users, if have mounted them by mistake on the entry level *istD camera. regards Rüdiger
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Marnie wrote: First time I've heard this. I switched lately from Velvia to Provia F because a lot on this list said it scanned better since Velvia is more color saturated. And that does appear to be true based on my recent scanning experience. But what does low accutance mean? Huh? REPLY: Accutance is basically another word for sharpness. More precisely how parts of an image is separated from another adjacent parts. Provia F is in reality less sharp than Kodachrome 200; a very coarse grained film, but it has much higher resolution. Provia F is significantly less sharp than both Velvia and Kodachrome 25; it only about half as sharp but resolve more. In real life Provia F shown more deatil but the details are fuzzy whereas eg. Kodachrome show less detail but the details it shown are very sharp. I actually prefer high accutance before high resolution (within reason) and it is also what digital does well. I'm certain that digital will affect lens designers choice of compromises in lenses. Pål
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Marnie wrote: First time I've heard this. I switched lately from Velvia to Provia F because a lot on this list said it scanned better since Velvia is more color saturated. And that does appear to be true based on my recent scanning experience. But what does low accutance mean? Huh? REPLY: Accutance is basically another word for sharpness. More precisely how parts of an image is separated from another adjacent parts. Provia F is in reality less sharp than Kodachrome 200; a very coarse grained film, but it has much higher resolution. Provia F is significantly less sharp than both Velvia and Kodachrome 25; it only about half as sharp but resolve more. In real life Provia F shown more deatil but the details are fuzzy whereas eg. Kodachrome show less detail but the details it shown are very sharp. I actually prefer high accutance before high resolution (within reason) and it is also what digital does well. I'm certain that digital will affect lens designers choice of compromises in lenses. Pål Reply to Reply: Thanks! That's very interesting. Guess I wasn't weird after all to really like Velvia. But it does make me sort of wonder where Velvia 100 will fall within those parameters. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First time I've heard this. I switched lately from Velvia to Provia F because a lot on this list said it scanned better since Velvia is more color saturated. That lot said that it scans better because of its lower Dmax and finer grain. cheers, caveman
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
The film lenses suck for digital syndrome was immediately apparent with the full-frame EOS-1ds too. One of the culprits is the bayer pixels disposition in the sensor, that makes it more sensitive to colour fringe towards the edges of the image. When the oblique lines of red or blue sensitive pixels align with the hard edges in the image, it effectively amplifies any colour aberration. Servus, Alin Mark wrote: MR In the simplest terms: The sensors of DSLRs are generally smaller than MR full-frame 35mm format (commonly by a factor of 1.5 - hence the 1.5x MR focal length multiplication effect). Thus you need to enlarge an image MR 1.5 times as much for a given print size. Therefore your lens must have MR 1.5 times higher resolution for equal quality at a given print size. MR Apparently this has caught quite a few people by surprise: There have MR been people who found that their so-so quality lenses that gave decent MR (but not great) performance on their film cameras simply didn't cut it MR on their DSLRs. The 1.5x greater enlargement necessary showed up the MR deficiencies of the lenses that went unnoticed at the lesser MR magnification necessary when making prints from film. MR If your DSLR effectively multiplies your focal length by 1.5, it also MR *divides* the lens' resolution by 1.5. So you'll want to use top-notch MR lenses whenever possible. I think the 31mm f/1.8 Limited would make a MR fine normal lens for the *ist-D, though!
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Looking for primes for digital is a wise decision. Waiting for full frame is even wiser. Personally I couldn't care less for current Pentax zooms in the *ist d equation. The focal ranges are all scrambled up to the point of rendering it useless. Trans-standards become what, portrait zooms ? Tele-zooms are pushed towards the long end, where image quality drops anyway. Wide angle zooms barely fit the standard lens bill: we're back in the era where 35-70 was an amazing lens. Servus, Alin Harold wrote: HO As I more interested in the 320 end of the lens I will just have to keep HO an eye out for a reasonably priced 300mm prime, preferably Pentax or any HO 3rd party manufacturer who makes a decent 300mm f4. HO From what other people have said about digital cameras and 35mm designed HO zoom lenses I think I will wait until the ist D is on the market before HO making any lens purchases!
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
This wouldn't suprise me at all. The first time I scanned film and viewed at 100%, my first thought was: This scanner is CRAP. The inkjet prints delighted me with their sharpness compared to the screen. Rob Studdert wrote, in part: When the Canon 1DS came out, lenses that seemed perfectly fine for 35mm all of a sudden sucked. Is it possibly more a case of the fact that film shooters who hadn't owned a decent film scanner finally got to zoom into their images on a big screen?
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Mark wrote: If your DSLR effectively multiplies your focal length by 1.5, it also *divides* the lens' resolution by 1.5. So you'll want to use top-notch lenses whenever possible. I think the 31mm f/1.8 Limited would make a fine normal lens for the *ist-D, though! REPLY: Perhaps this is a factor in the compatibility issues of the *istD? Perhaps K and particularly M lenses are not that well suited for digital? At least I know Pentax reps were concerned about these issues at the time of the MD-S. They feared customers that were not happy with the results with their current lenses. I've even noticed how differnt lenses may perform in response to various films. Provia F in particular being a high resolution/low accutance film. It simply doesn't mate well with all lenses! Pål
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Alin wrote: The film lenses suck for digital syndrome was immediately apparent with the full-frame EOS-1ds too. One of the culprits is the bayer pixels disposition in the sensor, that makes it more sensitive to colour fringe towards the edges of the image. When the oblique lines of red or blue sensitive pixels align with the hard edges in the image, it effectively amplifies any colour aberration. Hmmm. I am waiting for a full-framer. I won't buy the starkistdee myself, although I may have my lab buy one. This alarms me. I carry a gaggle of good quality lenses, on which I have spent too much. I have been awaiting a full-frome digital slr on which to mount them. Now I may not be able to use some/all of them? Is there a way to know in advance which lenses will/won't work with a full-frame digital slr? Where can one find out more about this? Should I stop waiting and just buy one of the 5 mp slr-like digicams? Thanks, Joe
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Harry wrote: At the moment there is virtually no information coming from Pentax on possible 'D' type lenses for the digital SLR. REPLY: They have promised more lenses in the fall particularly suited for the *istD. Personally I think it is both focal lenghts and optics optimized for a DSLR. Pål
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I carry a gaggle of good quality lenses, on which I have spent too much. I have been awaiting a full-frome digital slr on which to mount them. Now I may not be able to use some/all of them? If you've bought top-quality glass I wouldn't worry. It's only the marginal performers (consumer grade stuff, for the most part) that may be inadequate. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
-Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there a way to know in advance which lenses will/won't work with a full-frame digital slr? I don't think it's a matter of them not working, it's a matter of finding out some of your lenses aren't as good as others. You could do the same thing now by enlarging all your negs to 11x14. Should I stop waiting and just buy one of the 5 mp slr-like digicams? No, you should wait like everyone else for the *ist-D. tv
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Joseph wrote: JT Hmmm. I am waiting for a full-framer. I won't buy the starkistdee JT myself, although I may have my lab buy one. JT This alarms me. I carry a gaggle of good quality lenses, on which I have JT spent too much. I have been awaiting a full-frome digital slr on which JT to mount them. Now I may not be able to use some/all of them? Likely there are lenses that will behave worse than others. However, I doubt there's any way to know for sure in advance. JT Is there a way to know in advance which lenses will/won't work with a JT full-frame digital slr? JT Where can one find out more about this? Maybe you should download and see for yourself some of the D1s full-frame images available on review sites. JT Should I stop waiting and just buy one of the 5 mp slr-like digicams? Surely not for serious use. If it really burns, you might as well wait a bit more, pay a bit more and get the *istd. As a side note, I think I have enough patience for the full framer below $1000. Servus, Alin
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
That depends on what do you intend to use it for. For general purpose photography (which probably means, if one midrange zoom is enough and ISO400 and higher is not required), high end digicams are pretty good. I'd say, go for it, for under $400 one can get a very decent 4MP one. Canon G2 comes to mind. I know since I got one. Mishka Should I stop waiting and just buy one of the 5 mp slr-like digicams?
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Rüdiger wrote: So, you think that the entry level lenses like the FAJ 18-35, FAJ 28-80 and the FAJ 70-300 which are specialy made for the entry level *istD are better then good the old lenses like the K 2/35, K 1.8/85 or K 2.5/135. REPLY: No I don't. Fisrtly, they don't appeal to the same customers. Secondly, there are very few of those K lenses around but plentyful of M lenses that all were consumer grade at their time. Many of those are zooms. Theorethically at least, a lens like the 18-35 could be made with optical compromises that benefits a not full frame DSLR. Eg. sacrificing edge sharpness for center sharpness to a degree that may be seen as not very suitable for a lens used for film. Time will tell Anyway, it is almost certain that DSLR's will affect chosen compromises in new lenses and that some old lenses may have optical qualities/compromises that don't benefit DSLR's but unproblematic for film. So far, the reports from Nikon and Canon users suggest that this is the case. Pål
RE: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Tom wrote: I don't think it's a matter of them not working, it's a matter of finding out some of your lenses aren't as good as others. You could do the same thing now by enlarging all your negs to 11x14. REPLY: But I also think it is a case of what the lens is good at. As I said in a previous post, I've noticed that different qualities in lenses yields different result with different films. Eg. Provia F, a high resolution - low accutance film, yield lousy images with lenses that have traded resolution for high accutance. For digital I believe a lower resolving lens with high accutance may work extremely well, or?. Pål
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
I'd suggest that, while a person waits, she/he should acquire a nice Pentax digital PS to use in the meanwhile. That way, when the dream comes true, you will be that much ahead of the digital darkroom part of the game and not way behind the power curve. Just a thought. Len --- Looking for primes for digital is a wise decision. Waiting for full frame is even wiser. Personally I couldn't care less for current Pentax zooms in the *ist d equation. The focal ranges are all scrambled up to the point of rendering it useless. Trans-standards become what, portrait zooms ? Tele-zooms are pushed towards the long end, where image quality drops anyway. Wide angle zooms barely fit the standard lens bill: we're back in the era where 35-70 was an amazing lens. Servus, Alin _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Rüdiger wrote: So, you think that the entry level lenses like the FAJ 18-35, FAJ 28-80 and the FAJ 70-300 which are specialy made for the entry level *istD are better then good the old lenses like the K 2/35, K 1.8/85 or K 2.5/135. REPLY from Pal No I don't. Fisrtly, they don't appeal to the same customers. Why, entry level lenses for a entry level *ist and *istD. I have heard several times the *istD is entry level therefore it do not need a aperture simulator. The FAJ lenses are also entry level without aperture ring. So the fit perfectly to the *ist and *istD. A FA* 2.8/80-200 do not fit to the *istD as the powerzoom and the aperture ring is meaningless. regards Rüdiger
RE: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
I'd like to see a 5 or 6 meg dp+s with a fixed lens of 28-35mm, with an aperture of 1.4 or 2, made possible by the smaller sensor. A companion 75 or 80mm would be nice too. And a decent optical viewfinder, Tom. And real manual rangefinder focus aids. I hate to say this, but the Mrs played with a friend's Powershot S40 (? can't remember) and based on 2 days of that is now ready to dump her MX and 3 lenses! After I picked myself up off the floor, and listened to her reasons (loved it / inspired me / and haven't used the MX in months) I started to ponder what to get her. An Optio came very close, and I seriously considered the Leica Digilux, but in the end I snagged a new G2 - mainly because the batteries are the same as the D60 and it comes in black g...but here' me thinking that I could bag it for a bit of street shooting, and it will probably do fine, but all I want is a good viewfinder (NOT LCD) and manual focus.. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Will lenses such as the Pentax 80-320mm (which according to reports I have read is slightly soft at the 200-320mm range) be improved with the advent of the forthcoming Pentax digital SLR? Digital cameras in general allow you to alter the sharpness, contrast and saturation settings, and numerous imaging programs allow one to adjust barrel and pincushion distortion. It is also my understanding that a lens that is not sharp at the edges would be improved on a digital camera due to the size of the ccd sensor. My reason for asking this question is that I have the opportunity to buy a Pentax 80-320mm at a reasonable price and whilst it would be a reasonable consumer lens on a SLR could in theory be improved by tweaking controls on a digital camera. Does this make sense or am I barking up the wrong tree! Harry -- Harold Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
No. The dSLR's are more sensitiv to lens quality than film based kameras. Partially, of course, because of the small sensor chips, as an unsharp photo will have to be blown more up to obtain the same picture size. Of course it may be fixed to some degree with USM, but there is a limit before it just looks bad in a different way. But also because of the structure of the sensor itself. The Bayer sensors are more sensitiv to chromatic abberations. As you say, some things may be fixed with software, like distortion or lack of contrast, but other things are not so easy. I have been warned by some dSLR enthusiasts (among them the guy mentioned here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0307/03070801nikkor1224review.asp) that some of my lenses, especially zoom lenses, may not be good enough to use on a digital SLR, even if they are quite good with my current cameras. DagT Fra: Harold Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Will lenses such as the Pentax 80-320mm (which according to reports I have read is slightly soft at the 200-320mm range) be improved with the advent of the forthcoming Pentax digital SLR? Digital cameras in general allow you to alter the sharpness, contrast and saturation settings, and numerous imaging programs allow one to adjust barrel and pincushion distortion. It is also my understanding that a lens that is not sharp at the edges would be improved on a digital camera due to the size of the ccd sensor. My reason for asking this question is that I have the opportunity to buy a Pentax 80-320mm at a reasonable price and whilst it would be a reasonable consumer lens on a SLR could in theory be improved by tweaking controls on a digital camera. Does this make sense or am I barking up the wrong tree! Harry -- Harold Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Harold, the 80-320 at the long end is not much better in the center than at the corners, and it doesn't improve a lot by stopping down either. I think it's a nice lens just by this consistency of image quality. However, I don't think that above 200 mm it'll fit the sharpness requirements of the *ist d sensor (60 lppm). Servus, Alin Harold wrote: HO Will lenses such as the Pentax 80-320mm (which according to reports I HO have read is slightly soft at the 200-320mm range) be improved with the HO advent of the forthcoming Pentax digital SLR? HO Digital cameras in general allow you to alter the sharpness, contrast HO and saturation settings, and numerous imaging programs allow one to HO adjust barrel and pincushion distortion. It is also my understanding HO that a lens that is not sharp at the edges would be improved on a HO digital camera due to the size of the ccd sensor. HO My reason for asking this question is that I have the opportunity to buy HO a Pentax 80-320mm at a reasonable price and whilst it would be a reasonable HO consumer lens on a SLR could in theory be improved by tweaking controls on a HO digital camera. HO Does this make sense or am I barking up the wrong tree!
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Harold, the 80-320 at the long end is not much better in the center than at the corners, and it doesn't improve a lot by stopping down either. I think it's a nice lens just by this consistency of image quality. However, I don't think that above 200 mm it'll fit the sharpness requirements of the *ist d sensor (60 lppm). Thanks for the information on the 80-320 Alin. I was hoping that centre sharpness would have been a lot better than the edges. As I more interested in the 320 end of the lens I will just have to keep an eye out for a reasonably priced 300mm prime, preferably Pentax or any 3rd party manufacturer who makes a decent 300mm f4. From what other people have said about digital cameras and 35mm designed zoom lenses I think I will wait until the ist D is on the market before making any lens purchases! Harry -- Harold Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
I think the only one of the scenarios you mentioned that really works is edge sharpness improvements with small frame sensors. Otherwise digital is very brutal about showing lens flaws. When the Canon 1DS came out, lenses that seemed perfectly fine for 35mm all of a sudden sucked. tv From what you have said Tom regarding the Canon scenario, one is going to have problems with some of the cheaper Pentax consumer zooms. Just hope that the prime FA lenses will be more adaptable to the Pentax *ist D. At the moment there is virtually no information coming from Pentax on possible 'D' type lenses for the digital SLR. Harry -- Harold Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
I have been warned by some dSLR enthusiasts (among them the guy mentioned here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0307/03070801nikkor1224review.asp) that some of my lenses, especially zoom lenses, may not be good enough to use on a digital SLR, even if they are quite good with my current cameras. DagT Thanks for that link DagT the review of the Nikon 'DX' lens was interesting. I have a number of prime lenses that will hopefully work ok with the *ist D when it arrives. The small number of zoom lenses that I have will be used with film SLRs if they are not good enought for use with a digital camera. Harry -- Harold Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
On 10 Jul 2003 at 11:04, tom wrote: I think the only one of the scenarios you mentioned that really works is edge sharpness improvements with small frame sensors. Otherwise digital is very brutal about showing lens flaws. When the Canon 1DS came out, lenses that seemed perfectly fine for 35mm all of a sudden sucked. Is it possibly more a case of the fact that film shooters who hadn't owned a decent film scanner finally got to zoom into their images on a big screen? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
I have been warned by some dSLR enthusiasts (among them the guy mentioned here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0307/03070801nikkor1224review.asp) that some of my lenses, especially zoom lenses, may not be good enough to use on a digital SLR, even if they are quite good with my current cameras. Could someone explain why some existing lenses may not be good enough to use with a digital slr? Many of us are waiting for the right digital slr precisely so we can use our existing lenses with it. Joe
Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?
Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been warned by some dSLR enthusiasts (among them the guy mentioned here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0307/03070801nikkor1224review.asp) that some of my lenses, especially zoom lenses, may not be good enough to use on a digital SLR, even if they are quite good with my current cameras. Could someone explain why some existing lenses may not be good enough to use with a digital slr? Many of us are waiting for the right digital slr precisely so we can use our existing lenses with it. In the simplest terms: The sensors of DSLRs are generally smaller than full-frame 35mm format (commonly by a factor of 1.5 - hence the 1.5x focal length multiplication effect). Thus you need to enlarge an image 1.5 times as much for a given print size. Therefore your lens must have 1.5 times higher resolution for equal quality at a given print size. Apparently this has caught quite a few people by surprise: There have been people who found that their so-so quality lenses that gave decent (but not great) performance on their film cameras simply didn't cut it on their DSLRs. The 1.5x greater enlargement necessary showed up the deficiencies of the lenses that went unnoticed at the lesser magnification necessary when making prints from film. If your DSLR effectively multiplies your focal length by 1.5, it also *divides* the lens' resolution by 1.5. So you'll want to use top-notch lenses whenever possible. I think the 31mm f/1.8 Limited would make a fine normal lens for the *ist-D, though! -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
