P. J. Alling wrote:
> Yea, compare it to the best... Poor thing must have gotten an
> inferiority complex. I didn't like this lens on film as much as I liked
> the FA 28~70 F4.0 many it rest in peace. Seems that most aren't happy
> with that lens on digital...
>
> I think that the F 35-70mm probably out resolves the 6mp sensor. Maybe
> I'll be disappointed with it when I finally get a K10D.
>
> Doug Franklin wrote:
>
>> Boy, that sure wasn't my experience [with the smc Pentax F 35-70mm
>> f3.5~4.5]. [...] I was disappointed in the sharpness, [...]
>> flare control was certainly up to Pentax' (high) standards. [...]
>> could've seemed less sharp because the same rolls contained shots
>> from the FA* 200/2.8 and F* 300/4.5 and A 50/1.4.
I guess I should give it a try on the *ist D.
When I got back into photography after a long hiatus, it was a handful
of months before the ZX-5n/MZ-5n came out, so I ended up getting a ZX-5.
Trying to economize, I also got the F 35-70 and F 100-300 lenses with it.
I made those decisions in the emotional aftermath of trying to shoot the
first Petit le Mans with a K-1000 and a couple of Promaster zooms (35-80
and 80-200). They were *not* the best decisions I ever made, or the
most considered ones.
>From almost the beginning, I wasn't satisfied with the 100-300. At
first I thought it was me. After I bought some serious glass, I found
it wasn't. Since I shoot mostly at the long end of the focal length
spectrum, it quickly went into a box in the closet while better lenses
populated my field bag.
For a long time, I was mostly satisfied with the F 35-70, but I always
felt that I wasn't getting the images I should be getting from it. It
had been quite a while, but I got into this hobby with a K-1000 and an
SMC-M 50/1.4 and a buttload of Tri-X Pan, many moons ago. The F wasn't
coming close to what I was expecting.
When I got an A 50/1.4 I finally started getting the images I expected.
Granted, it's one of the best 35mm SLR lenses around, but it's what
that old M 50/1.4 had trained me to expect.
As I attempted more motorsports photography (it's almost all I do
anymore), I realized that it was a situation where the equipment really
does matter. So I started getting good long lenses, like the FA*
200/2.8 and F* 300/4.5. I couldn't afford the FA* 600/4 or FA 400/5.6
or FA* 400/2.8 or FA* 300/2.8, but if I could, I'd snap them up in a
second. I have a Sigma 400/5.6 APO Macro that's good, but I still want
the Pentax.
[BTW, the FA* 200/2.8 and F* 300/4.5 are absolutely, bar none, the cat's
meow. It took me a long time to find them at reasonable prices, but it
was worth the wait. I can't wait to see how they perform on the K10D,
because they look as good on the *ist D as they did on 35mm film.]
I don't have credentials, so I have to shoot from the cold side of the
fences. That means distance. I'm used to working corners where the
cars are a dozen feet or less away. Shooting from the "nearby hillside"
just annoys the heck out of me, in addition to making it more difficult
for me to get the shots I want to get. The shots that I know are not
only there, but that none of the "pros" there are going to get.
[Note: The skills for getting good shots at 10 feet are a bit different
than the ones for 50m with a long lens. :-) ]
<rant>
One thing that just annoys the feces out of me is the "herd photography"
I see at pro race events. At the Petit le Mans last weekend, there were
probably somewhere north of 100 credentialed still photogs and more
credentialed video photogs. And they move around the track like a herd
of bison on the prairie. For the Thursday night practice session, the
course marshals ("corner workers") at turn seven had to call in to race
control asking for "crowd control" support, because they had /31/
photogs blocking the Emergency Vehicles (EVs) access to the track,
between the turn station and the "Jersey Barrier" wall to drivers'
right. WTF?! Get off your lazy asses.
I work corners, so I know a lot of the corner workers at any given event
at several tracks. All I would have to do is work one day of an event
to have a "track" access pass, which would get me to virtually any "hot"
area on the property, and virtually none of the "VIP" areas.
Since I work corners, I'm used to being in places and situations on the
"hot side" that most people don't encounter. So maybe I'm being a
little hard on the "herd". But I don't really think so. It only takes
a little bit of looking around to find great shots that no one is
exploiting.
Unfortunately, I don't have a "blue vest" (official credentials), so I
(mostly) haven't been able to take advantage of this. One case where
some "friendlies" took care of me was the first turn of the first lap of
last year's Petit, and it resulted in these shots:
http://NutDriver.org/Wreck/Narrative.shtml
When I took those photos, only one "pro" was anywhere nearby, and no
amateurs of any stripe. We were in what is euphemistically termed the
"impact area", and almost participated in an "impact", but for the skill
of the drivers. It was a dangerous spot, no doubt about it. But that's
where the shots are that no one else is taking. And you don't even need
long lenses for a lot of the best shots. Something like a 28-80/2.8 on
35mm film would do for more than 80% of it. But you do need quick
reflexes and a preternatural sense of hearing and danger. :-) The
ability to quickly lug a 20# fire bottle through the gravel is
appreciated, too.
There was a "herd" of about 50 photogs to our right about 30 meters, all
getting the same shot, broadside to rear quarter. Not really exciting
or explanatory. That one pro and I got a sequence that clearly showed
the entire incident, staring down the muzzle, as it were. We also got a
shirt full of gravel. If only I'd known who to contact to sell it to.
</rant>
So, to get back on point after all that drivel, I guess the situation is
that as I've demanded more of the equipment, and as my skill has
improved, I've been moving up-market on lenses, and I've gotten a lot
more critical of the glass, and I'm less likely to ascribe quality
issues to myself, because I have a better regimen that largely
eliminates "one off" effects.
Net/net, the F 35-70 was up to my standards at one time, but now it
isn't. But it's being compared against some of the best glass Pentax
has ever made.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
