On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:44 PM, P. J. Alling <[email protected]> wrote: > Just a few quick shots with El Cheepo Kalimar 500mm mirror lens. > > All shot with the K20D ISO 1600 RAW > > If you do everything right and the Gods smile it's a pretty good lens. It > lacks a little bit in contrast, but you can easily dial that back in with > the raw converter. > > <http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20500mm-lens-test-0.html> > > Examining the center in focus portion of the image we see when you get the > focus right it's pretty damn sharp, you just have to bump the contrast a > bit. > > <http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20500mm-lens-test-0-100percent.html> > > So I tried it out on a less cooperative subject... > > Well the highlights were close to blown but not too bad. Difficult subject > bright white bird. > > http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20500mm-lens-test-1.html > > So I tried again. > > Well this time I defiantly missed focus, not by much but there's not a lot > of DOF to begin with. Still not bad, I'd never have gotten this close > without this lens. > > http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20500mm-lens-test-2.html > > Last but not least there's this. > > <RANT> Now this was just maddening. I've been shooting digital for at least > four years and I've never had a file write failure in the camera, but this > one is obviously is subtly corrupted, Pentax Photo Browser opens it fine but > Photo Lab fails. Irfanview opens it but creates an intermediate tiff from > the embedded JPEG, it's heavily compress, so there are limited adjustments I > can make without artifacts becoming very evident, but it was the /Best/ > Egret photo so I'm going to show it anyway. </rant> > > I still missed the focus by a bit or the bird moved... > > http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20500mm-lens-test-3.html > > Still if the Raw file wasn't bad, (and yes I tried to download it from the > card a second time and it was damaged in exactly the same way), I'm pretty > sure this would make a more than acceptable 8x10, maybe even 11x14. > > My conclusion. This isn't a bad little lens. Based on my test shots, when > I do everything right, I wouldn't be embarrassed to show 8x10 and maybe > larger prints from images made with it. It does have the typical donut > shaped out of focus highlights, but they're not objectionable if you're > careful using it.. It's very lightweight, lighter than the F 70-210 and not > a lot larger. Unlike most of the cast off photo gear people seem to think I > can give a good home to it's actually useful. > Post Script: Yes I can be an idiot. This little mirror lens probably would > benefit from a lens hood, and I decided to take one along while tramping > through the swamp. So I grabbed the original Vivitar Series 1 all metal > hood for the 90-180mm Flat Field zoom, and I managed to lose it. Damn, I > found that hood in a junk box in a Camera store that went out of business, > and I'll likely never find another that matches that lens. Damn, Damn, > Damn... >
Not bad for the money, in fact not bad period, except that's some pretty nasty bokeh. Still, a mirror lens is always a compromise, isn't it? cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- 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.
