Re: Are the lenses really that good?
>Only three film-era 28-105's? >From what I gathered, there's the PZ, the rebadged Tamron, and the later f3.2. >Anyway, I have the FA28-105/4-5.6, bought new with my PZ-1p, >probably the first generation of this lens type. Tried it recently on the K-1. Does not work well, >unless you like purple outlines around everything. I thought I would keep it for sentimental >reasons, but will sell it for spare change plus postage if you want to try it. > >stan I have the PZ and use it regularly on the K5. It seems to work well. Of the post-wedding pics that I posted ... the tractor shot was done with it. I'm quite satisfied with it. And these days they go cheap. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Are the lenses really that good?
Collin B wrote: I read a good review on the D FA 28-105. But $500? While I appreciate Pentax, ok Ricoh, apparently pulling a Sony and going largely pro-sumer with some quality glass, I need to be able to afford it. :-) I have been pleasantly surprised by the quality. It has become my default outdoor lens, with my tamron 28-75/2.8 being my default indoor zoom and my 50/1.4 being my default prime. Has anyone compared the three film 28-105 lenses to the D FA? I don't know about optical quality, but it has weather sealing, and that's a big deal. If I could afford the weather sealed 24-70, I'm not sure how my usage would line up, the added range is nice to have. Also, I've put the FA50/2.8 macro on a DSLR in shop. Have to be careful about light intensity as I can get a blue spot in the middle of the images. Have read of this on Nikon forums as well. It appears to be a conflict between the character of the old film coatings against reflections off the sensor. But it only happens under product lighting (FL). (Never happened with the A50/2.8 Macro.) Anyone else here dealing/dealt with the issue? Have you had the problem if you use black, or grey backdrops? Are your backdrops and lights set up so that they reflect the light straight back into lens down the line of sight? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Are the lenses really that good?
Sent from my iPad > On Nov 18, 2016, at 5:55 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > > I don't know from first hand experience the quality of the Pentax 28-105mm, > but I think you're asking the wrong question. > > Whether the D FA 28-105 is that good or not is irrelevant. Look at the > prices for equivalent lenses from other manufactures that offer cameras with > FF sensors. > > ... >> On 11/18/2016 9:01 AM, Collin B wrote: >> I read a good review on the D FA 28-105. But $500? >> While I appreciate Pentax, ok Ricoh, apparently pulling a Sony and going >> largely pro-sumer with some quality glass, I need to be able to afford it. >> :-) >> Has anyone compared the three film 28-105 lenses to the D FA? >> ... Only three film-era 28-105's? Anyway, I have the FA28-105/4-5.6, bought new with my PZ-1p, probably the first generation of this lens type. Tried it recently on the K-1. Does not work well, unless you like purple outlines around everything. I thought I would keep it for sentimental reasons, but will sell it for spare change plus postage if you want to try it. stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Are the lenses really that good?
I don't know from first hand experience the quality of the Pentax 28-105mm, but I think you're asking the wrong question. Whether the D FA 28-105 is that good or not is irrelevant. Look at the prices for equivalent lenses from other manufactures that offer cameras with FF sensors. I haven't actually done an extensive search but, to start out with the only lens I could find that actually matches the gross specifications of the Pentax is an older Tamron Adaptal which B&H is selling for about $500. Nikon doesn't have a FF in that exact focal range, but their 24-85mm f3.8~5.6 is selling at B&H for, oh look at that about $500. Canon has a 24-105mm f3.5~5.6 which is selling selling for $600. Canon also has a 28-135mm f3.5~5.6 selling for $300. I suppose you could take the average and say Canon is about the same but selling for less... Sony well they don't have a pro-sumer zoom in A mount, according to their site anyway, so you go straight to their 24-70 f2.8 pro offering at about two grand, for the E mount they offer a 28-70mm f3.5~5.6 for, oh, look, about $500. So there's your answer if you want a second tier normal zoom for a full frame digital camera in any current system, you're going to pay $500 whether it's worth it or not. As to the macro reflection issues, I don't have a good answer. It might depend on what are you using for light sources. Flash or continuous. If continuous, tungsten, florescent, or LED. Maybe you can change the lighting type to alleviate the problem. I really don't know it's not an issue I've run into. On 11/18/2016 9:01 AM, Collin B wrote: I read a good review on the D FA 28-105. But $500? While I appreciate Pentax, ok Ricoh, apparently pulling a Sony and going largely pro-sumer with some quality glass, I need to be able to afford it. :-) Has anyone compared the three film 28-105 lenses to the D FA? Also, I've put the FA50/2.8 macro on a DSLR in shop. Have to be careful about light intensity as I can get a blue spot in the middle of the images. Have read of this on Nikon forums as well. It appears to be a conflict between the character of the old film coatings against reflections off the sensor. But it only happens under product lighting (FL). (Never happened with the A50/2.8 Macro.) Anyone else here dealing/dealt with the issue? -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Are the lenses really that good?
I read a good review on the D FA 28-105. But $500? While I appreciate Pentax, ok Ricoh, apparently pulling a Sony and going largely pro-sumer with some quality glass, I need to be able to afford it. :-) Has anyone compared the three film 28-105 lenses to the D FA? Also, I've put the FA50/2.8 macro on a DSLR in shop. Have to be careful about light intensity as I can get a blue spot in the middle of the images. Have read of this on Nikon forums as well. It appears to be a conflict between the character of the old film coatings against reflections off the sensor. But it only happens under product lighting (FL). (Never happened with the A50/2.8 Macro.) Anyone else here dealing/dealt with the issue? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
