Thanks for your interest. This particular photo was made with an Pentax M42 Fish-Eye-Takumar 17mm f/4, fitted to a Panasonic L1 (4/3 System format). This one:
<http://homepage.mac.com/godders/PANL1-17MM/content/bin/images/large/ IMGP6034.jpg> <http://homepage.mac.com/godders/PANL1-17MM/content/bin/images/large/ IMGP6035.jpg> as opposed to Cotty's: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/PANL1-17MM/content/bin/images/large/ IMGP6040.jpg http://homepage.mac.com/godders/PANL1-17MM/content/bin/images/large/ IMGP6038.jpg I tested it vs the smc Pentax 17/4 FishEye that I picked up for Cotty and see absolutely no differences in contrast, saturation, sharpness, etc. A note I remember seeing on the SMC Takumars indicated that some of them, just before they switched nomenclature on the barrels, were actually SMC grade, but there's no way for me to know whether that's the case for this lens. It is certainly the same optical formula. Regards how much fishy-ness the lens demonstrates on the L1 body, I did some testing comparing it against similar focal lengths on both the L1 and K10D bodies ... http://homepage.mac.com/godders/K17FE-FOV/ You can see that it produces about the same field of view on the L1 as the DA21 does on the K10D (vertically) albeit with markedly more curvilinear distortion. On the K10D, the field of view is quite similar to the DA14, but again the curvilinear distortion is quite a lot more. For me, this lens is an excellent match to the L1 (I'm not really much of a fishy guy) in size, weight and handling. That said, I'm not entirely sure yet that I'll keep it ... Other options for a lens in this general focal length range are also appealing, but the gently fishy nature of this one adds spice and proves to be quite easy to correct to rectilinear: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/K17FE-01.jpg http://homepage.mac.com/godders/K17FE-02.jpg I don't really like it as much on the K10D ... I think the more oblong format is less interesting for a gentle curvilinear rendering. And I have the DA10-17 FE to work with at the moment on that camera, which provides a lot more capability. Godfrey On Sep 30, 2007, at 6:54 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: > I think he's using the smc p 17mm f4.0 on a reduced frame dslr. It > just > looks like a lot of barrel distortion, and is only noticeable if > there's > a straight line near the edge of the frame. Something this shot avoids > entirely. > >> Yes, I don't see they fisheye effect, but the shot really doesn't do >> anything for me. >>> http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/41.htm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
