What about SMC Pentax 55mm F/2 (K 55/2 # 1769*** which is reported better than SMC Pentax 50 mm F/1.2 in "My Lens Resolution Test Results". One is lying filter screw damaged and small scratches on front elements here in a shop of Lahore Pakistan but owner is not willing to make me a test. Any advice/comments from the largest folks around the planet mailing list will help to grab this normal lens. ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 7:01 PM Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #305
> ------------------------------ > > Content-Type: text/plain > > pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 04 : Issue 305 > > Today's Topics: > Re: PESO: Cruising Woodward, Two Ver [ Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: PS Saving in RAW [ "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: What lens do you find is on your [ Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Anyone shoot hockey with their digit [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: What lens do you find is on your [ Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > RE: mirror damage,was:cleaning focus [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Anyone shoot hockey with their d [ "cbwaters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Happy Thanksgiving... [ Jason Randolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Anyone shoot hockey with their d [ Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Happy Thanksgiving... [ Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens [ Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 06:56:45 -0500 > From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: PESO: Cruising Woodward, Two Versions > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Good. That's the consensus in my house as well. (I always poll my wife > and kids, when I'm in doubt about a shot.) I liked the mirror as well > but was afraid that it wouldn't read as the mirror on another car. But > apparently it does. Thanks for taking the time to look. I'll have to > hunt down that Elvis and Priscilla picture. I know someone took one at > last year's cruise. > Paul > On Nov 25, 2004, at 2:37 AM, Cotty wrote: > > > On 24/11/04, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: > > > >> The original version: > >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2907524&size=lg > > > > Much prefer the original. The mirror adds quirky interest. > > > >> The modified version: > >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2907709&size=lg > > > > You need some more wax on that door ;-) > > > > > > Cheers, > > Cotty > > > > > > ___/\__ > > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > > ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com > > _____________________________ > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:05:39 -0500 > From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I've used the M and the K 50/1.4. I prefer the K but only because the > build quality seems better. The optical performance of both is > excellent. I think that's true of all the Pentax 50mm lenses. Despite > what might be said here, I doubt that anyone could tell the difference > between them in terms of results. The only important difference is > speed. In that regard, a 1.4 or 1.2 is better than an f2 and marginally > better than an f 1.7. However, the 1.2 is very expensive and probably > not worth the extra money for most shooters. I may eventually pick up > an FA 50/1.4, just to have the convenience of autofocus. Like the other > Pentax 50s, it gets very high marks for optical performance. > On Nov 25, 2004, at 3:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Quoting Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >>> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is > >>> considered to be the best in terms of image quality? > >> > >> Oh boy - you're not going to get agreement here on this one - <g>. > >> > >> For the record, my choice is the A 50/1.4. > >> > >> Fred > >> > >> > >> > > > > I agree with Fred -- consensus seems unlikely. > > My choice is the M 50/1.4 but I've never met the A version of that one. > > The lens comments page assembled by Stan Halpin may be of interest. > > > > http://stans-photography.info > > > > ERNR > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:10:45 -0500 > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Sylwester Pietrzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > >> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is > >> considered to be the best in terms of image quality? > > > You may find interesting this: > > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-24.shtml > > I like the last sentence the best: "Remember, too, that obsessing > about lenses just isn't necessary. They all take great pictures. But > if it's fun for you, then do it! Messing around with cameras and > lenses is safe, pleasant, legal, and harms no one. All things > considered, it doesn't rank very high on the scale of silly vices." > > Fred > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:17:23 -0500 > From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: PS Saving in RAW > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > the original meaning of RAW was preempted by digital camera manufacturers. > they are not the same. > > Herb... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jerry in Houston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:33 PM > Subject: PS Saving in RAW > > > > I know about saving in RAW in the camera, but in PS > > 7.0.1 there is a "RAW" option when using "Save As".... > > does this have anything to do with using in camera > > RAW? Sorry if this seems like a stupid question. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:27:39 -0500 > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > >>> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is considered to > >>> be the best in terms of image quality? > > >> Oh boy - you're not going to get agreement here on this one - <g>. > >> > >> For the record, my choice is the A 50/1.4. > > > Why? What are the characteristics of that lens that makes you > > feel it's got the best image quality? > > Good point. The fact that each of us values different > characteristics differently contributes to what I believe would be a > lack of consensus. > > For me, I'd say that sharpness comes first, followed by either > contrast or bokeh (which is second and which is third will depend > upon the particular application at the time). > > The A 50/1.4 is quite sharp (a smidge better than its M predecessor) > ( http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/50's/resolutn.htm ) and has good > contrast (also better than the M by just a smidge). And, the bokeh > is good (although I think that this is not unusual for a Pentax 50). > > [The above is based on image quality alone. Other factors (for me) > that are not image-related but which are important include build > quality, focus feel, and the presence of Ka contacts. I do have to > admit that the A 50/1.4 does not feel quite as nice in use as do the > M, the K, or the m42 models of the design that I have used.] > > Fred > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:28:41 -0500 > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Henk Terhell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: What lens do you find is on your *istD most often > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > 4. FA 35/2 is also a very good standard (but it doesn't fit in my > > travel bag) > > > On my wish-list: > > (1. a larger bag) > > Har! > > Fred > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 06:26:24 -0600 > From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > format=flowed; > charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > > > > The UK magazine Amateur Photographer is currently running a Leica > > special and in it they review the new 50mm f1.4 ASPH lens for the > > rangefinder cameras. In the lengthy review it is mentioned that the > > Japanese go for high contrast whereas Leica engineer subtle > > gradation at the expense of absolute contrast. This gradation > > contributes to the famous Leica 3D effect. > > Sounds like the M50/1.4. > > William Robb > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:33:31 -0800 > From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hello, > I'm sort of a luddite because the latest version I own is the > A50/1.4. If I were to keep just one it would be the Super- > Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4 for overall sharpness, contrast, > and by far the best build quality. For best contrast I'd pick > the A50/1.4, but it is the softest of the my 1.4's wide open. > If I could never have a Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4, > I'd settle for the SMCP 50/1.4, as it is the closest thing to it, > but the SMCP 50/1.2 is still better at f1.2 and does have great > contrast also. > I love em all ;) > > Steve Larson > Redondo Beach, California > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Pearson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Pentax Discussion Board" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 7:57 PM > Subject: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > > > > Hi all, > > > > Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is > > considered to be the best in terms of image quality? > > > > > > Thanks! > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:40:46 -0800 > From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > SMCP 50/1.4 = SMCP K50/1.4 in the previous post. > Couple more things, for bokeh I think I would choose > the SMC K50/1.4. For the 3D effect it would be the > Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4. > Steve Larson > Redondo Beach, California > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 4:33 AM > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > > > > Hello, > > I'm sort of a luddite because the latest version I own is the > > A50/1.4. If I were to keep just one it would be the Super- > > Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4 for overall sharpness, contrast, > > and by far the best build quality. For best contrast I'd pick > > the A50/1.4, but it is the softest of the my 1.4's wide open. > > If I could never have a Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4, > > I'd settle for the SMCP 50/1.4, as it is the closest thing to it, > > but the SMCP 50/1.2 is still better at f1.2 and does have great > > contrast also. > > I love em all ;) > > > > Steve Larson > > Redondo Beach, California > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Steve Pearson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Pentax Discussion Board" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 7:57 PM > > Subject: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is > > > considered to be the best in terms of image quality? > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:41:18 -0500 > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > The optical performance of both is excellent. I think that's true > > of all the Pentax 50mm lenses. Despite what might be said here, I > > doubt that anyone could tell the difference between them in terms > > of results. > > I'd say that's probably generally true. > > > However, the 1.2 is very expensive and probably not worth the > > extra money for most shooters. > > The 50/1.2 is worth it if you do sometimes need the speed (not just > for low-light exposures but also for low-light focusing). It (both > inK and A trim) is not as sharp as are many of the other 50's at > wider apertures (except wider than f/1.4 - <g>), but it is very > sharp at mid-apertures. > > Fred > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:42:15 US/Eastern > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Anyone shoot hockey with their digital? > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > A friend at work(in our print department)has asked me to take some shots of his > young > lad playing hockey so that he can put a collage together for his wife as a Christmas > present. I have no > problem doing this as he has done a ton of favours for me at work. > > I know my camera and the istD can do present WB for unusual situations, like this. Any > one have > experience at hockey. Do i set the preset from the ice or the general lighting from what > may be over > head. I'll be shooting Jpg and Raw,but i still dont have anything worthy of working with > Raw yet,nor > does our print department. May try Elements 3 or just buy the dam Nikon Capture for > $150.00.:-) > > Dave > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:43:53 -0500 > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Steve Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > I love em all ;) > > And you can't have too many 50's, right? <vbg> > > Fred (guilty as charged) > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:47:02 +0100 > From: Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: What lens do you find is on your *istD most often > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > JB> I'm now looking at a Sigma f2.8/18-50mm to replace the Tokina 28-70mm, which > JB> has a focusing problem and is not really wide enough. > > One finally arrived and I did a quick evaluation in the shop, shooting > from their balcony (overviewing a big park, convenient for lens > testing <g>). > > So far, it's interesting. The 50mm performance is quite good, even > wide open. The 18mm performance is worse with vignetting and coma. At > f/4, it's overall good. I got some mixed feelings about it, so I will > do a more comprehensive post in few days. > > Just remember that sample variation might exist. > > Good light! > fra > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:47:37 -0800 > From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi Fred, > The 1.2 is king for low-light focusing. I feel it sharpens up > very nicely at f4. > Steve Larson > Redondo Beach, California > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > The 50/1.2 is worth it if you do sometimes need the speed (not just > > for low-light exposures but also for low-light focusing). It (both > > inK and A trim) is not as sharp as are many of the other 50's at > > wider apertures (except wider than f/1.4 - <g>), but it is very > > sharp at mid-apertures. > > > > Fred > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:48:21 -0800 > From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hehe, so true! > > Steve Larson > Redondo Beach, California > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 4:43 AM > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > > > > > I love em all ;) > > > > And you can't have too many 50's, right? <vbg> > > > > Fred (guilty as charged) > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:55:28 -0800 > From: Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Paul Stenquist wrote: > > > I've used the M and the K 50/1.4. I prefer the K but only because the > > build quality seems better. The optical performance of both is > > excellent. I think that's true of all the Pentax 50mm lenses. Despite > > what might be said here, I doubt that anyone could tell the difference > > between them in terms of results. The only important difference is > > speed. In that regard, a 1.4 or 1.2 is better than an f2 and marginally > > better than an f 1.7. However, the 1.2 is very expensive and probably > > not worth the extra money for most shooters. I may eventually pick up an > > FA 50/1.4, just to have the convenience of autofocus. Like the other > > Pentax 50s, it gets very high marks for optical performance. > > The consensus seems to favor the SMC Pentax 50mm f/1.4, with the SMC > Pentax 50mm f/1.7 close behind, if not it's equal, at 2 stops either > side of f/8.0. Very sharp, top qualality lens, top quality build. > As for bokeh, I'll let others step in... > > keith whaley > > > On Nov 25, 2004, at 3:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> Quoting Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >>>> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is > >>>> considered to be the best in terms of image quality? > > >>> Oh boy - you're not going to get agreement here on this one - <g>. > >>> For the record, my choice is the A 50/1.4. > >>> Fred > > >> I agree with Fred -- consensus seems unlikely. > >> My choice is the M 50/1.4 but I've never met the A version of that one. > >> The lens comments page assembled by Stan Halpin may be of interest. > >> > >> http://stans-photography.info > >> > >> ERNR > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:58:16 US/Eastern > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: mirror damage,was:cleaning focusing screen / pentaprism > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>Don Said: > > > > I have however cleaned a number of mirrors, > > I buy a lot of "as is" or "for parts/repair" > > 35's and some are unbelievably filthy. > > The method I've used is this: > > 1. "Tease" the end of several Q-Tips (Cotton swabs) > > until they look more like a string mop than a swab. > > 2. Starting out with one very wet with glass cleaner, > > "drag" it (ZERO pressure) over the mirror several times. > > Prior to joining this list,and in a non thinking mode day, i tried to field clean some > dust gunk, what have > you off my K1000 mirror. I used a lint free lens cloth bought at a local store and tried > to rub off the > offending particals. I did use SOME pressure on the mirror. I have always been a bit > worried i have > done some focus damage to the camera. It should go in for a CLA anyway(one of my film > horse > cameras,so its a bit dirty)and was wondering if most repair shops had equipment to check > mf cameras > for focus accuracy. Its still a great working camera but i just can't help wondering. > Or will the responce be shoot a roll and see if its in focus.<g> > > Dave > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:23:11 -0500 > From: "cbwaters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Anyone shoot hockey with their digital? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > format=flowed; > charset="Windows-1252"; > reply-type=original > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Dave, > Do a custom white balance off something white that's in the playing area > (NOT the ice). Get somebody to take a piece of paper out there pre-game and > get your WB set and you'll be good to go. > > CW > Has been using the auto white balance for a long time now but would > certainly custom for anything like this... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 2:42 AM > Subject: Anyone shoot hockey with their digital? > > > > > > A friend at work(in our print department)has asked me to take > > some shots of his > > young > > lad playing hockey so that he can put a collage together for his wife as a > > Christmas > > present. I have no > > problem doing this as he has done a ton of favours for me at work. > > > > I know my camera and the istD can do present WB for unusual situations, > > like this. Any > > one have > > experience at hockey. Do i set the preset from the ice or the general > > lighting from what > > may be over > > head. I'll be shooting Jpg and Raw,but i still dont have anything worthy > > of working with > > Raw yet,nor > > does our print department. May try Elements 3 or just buy the dam Nikon > > Capture for > > $150.00.:-) > > > > Dave > > > > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 11/22/2004 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 05:21:53 -0800 > From: Jason Randolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Happy Thanksgiving... > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > To all on the list, even if you don't celebrate the holiday I send good > wishes and hope that everyone spends a moment just thinking of what they > are truly grateful for. Expecially here in the States where many do not > realize just how good we have really got it. > > Hope everyone has a wonderful day... > > Jay on the Oregon coast > > (Here's to hoping I get some pictures on a surely rain filled weekend!) > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:25:32 -0500 > From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Interesting chart. The differences are probably imperceptible in most > cases, although the 1.4 A clearly outperformed the 1.4 M. I would like > to see how the 1.4 K and FA would do. Of course, this is just > resolution and doesn't include other factors. > > On Nov 25, 2004, at 7:27 AM, Fred wrote: > > >>>> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is considered to > >>>> be the best in terms of image quality? > > > >>> Oh boy - you're not going to get agreement here on this one - <g>. > >>> > >>> For the record, my choice is the A 50/1.4. > > > >> Why? What are the characteristics of that lens that makes you > >> feel it's got the best image quality? > > > > Good point. The fact that each of us values different > > characteristics differently contributes to what I believe would be a > > lack of consensus. > > > > For me, I'd say that sharpness comes first, followed by either > > contrast or bokeh (which is second and which is third will depend > > upon the particular application at the time). > > > > The A 50/1.4 is quite sharp (a smidge better than its M predecessor) > > ( http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/50's/resolutn.htm ) and has good > > contrast (also better than the M by just a smidge). And, the bokeh > > is good (although I think that this is not unusual for a Pentax 50). > > > > [The above is based on image quality alone. Other factors (for me) > > that are not image-related but which are important include build > > quality, focus feel, and the presence of Ka contacts. I do have to > > admit that the A 50/1.4 does not feel quite as nice in use as do the > > M, the K, or the m42 models of the design that I have used.] > > > > Fred > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:27:45 -0500 > From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I know I was surprised at the diffference in contraast between my > Summicron 50/2 Collapsible and my Pentax lenses. To me, the Leitz glass > produces almost a retro feel. Of course I'm talking about 50 year old > Leitz glass here, so it darn well ought to produce a retro feel ,<g>. > On Nov 25, 2004, at 7:26 AM, William Robb wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > > > > > >> The UK magazine Amateur Photographer is currently running a Leica > >> special and in it they review the new 50mm f1.4 ASPH lens for the > >> rangefinder cameras. In the lengthy review it is mentioned that the > >> Japanese go for high contrast whereas Leica engineer subtle gradation > >> at the expense of absolute contrast. This gradation contributes to > >> the famous Leica 3D effect. > > > > Sounds like the M50/1.4. > > > > William Robb > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:34:31 -0500 > From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Anyone shoot hockey with their digital? > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I've shot hockey. If you take a meter reading off the ice, you'll > grossly underexpose. Find something neutral that is getting as much > light as the ice (like a grey or greens shirt for example) and > spotmeter on that. Or if you can get to the ice, take a reading with an > incident meter. I've found that a 200mm lens is good if you can get > fairly close to the ice, but I've also shot with a 400 and monoped from > further up in the stands. If you can get on the ice during a practice > session, you could get some nice tight stuff with a 135. Part of the > problem is the glass that extends around the rink to keep the puck in. > On a lot of amateur rinks its scratched up plexi. Finding a place to > shoot through it or over it can be a problem. I once had an opportunity > to shoot from the penalty box. That worked out well. > On Nov 25, 2004, at 7:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > A friend at work(in our print department)has asked me to > > take some shots of his > > young > > lad playing hockey so that he can put a collage together for his wife > > as a Christmas > > present. I have no > > problem doing this as he has done a ton of favours for me at work. > > > > I know my camera and the istD can do present WB for unusual > > situations, like this. Any > > one have > > experience at hockey. Do i set the preset from the ice or the general > > lighting from what > > may be over > > head. I'll be shooting Jpg and Raw,but i still dont have anything > > worthy of working with > > Raw yet,nor > > does our print department. May try Elements 3 or just buy the dam > > Nikon Capture for > > $150.00.:-) > > > > Dave > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:38:57 -0500 > From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Happy Thanksgiving... > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Happy Thanksgiving to you as well. I will soon have to go get our > turkey out of the garage where he's been soaking an an apple cider > brine for the last three day. Time to feast. > Paul > On Nov 25, 2004, at 8:21 AM, Jason Randolph wrote: > > > To all on the list, even if you don't celebrate the holiday I send good > > wishes and hope that everyone spends a moment just thinking of what > > they > > are truly grateful for. Expecially here in the States where many do > > not realize just how good we have really got it. > > > > Hope everyone has a wonderful day... > > > > Jay on the Oregon coast > > > > (Here's to hoping I get some pictures on a surely rain filled weekend!) > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:53:05 -0500 > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Steve Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is considered to be > > the best in terms of image quality? > > And then, if we throw 50mm macro lenses into the mix, there may be > additional thoughts (on this 50mm "sub-category"). My personal > opinions: > > The F 50/2.8 (and I understand the FA is the same) is just a wee bit > better than the A 50/2.8 (which, in turn, is better than the M 50/4) > in both resolution and contrast. > > But, that's for image quality alone. If I include other factors, > the A 50/2.8 (which is a real joy to use) easily wins, hands down, > for 50mm macros. > > Fred > > -------------------------------- > End of pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 Issue #305 > ********************************************* >
