| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:54 pm Post subject: My 35mm f:2 SMC Takumar |
 |
|
dr.volkan wrote:
I like this lens 
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3693
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Some wild post processing there! Really hard to evaluate lens contribution that way.
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
Hmm, I would expect better results to be honest. These images look horrible to me.  But sharpness seem good as far as I can tell. 
EDIT: Oh, I see now that these were shot on a Pentax Q10 with a crop factor of 5.6. So this 35mm becomes like a 200mm tele.  How does this work out? Doesn't this also magnify all lens flaws like CA and such? I'd say judging by these samples the Q series cameras aren't worth the effort with adapting 35mm format SLR lenses...
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dr.volkan wrote:
I send the photos from phablet they seem ok on phone screen i think i must resize photos before sending when i look big photos i do not like them too..
I will send raw images for your opinions but they are b&w in camera.. Maybe problem is pentax q or my converting raw to joeg and ps problem?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dr.volkan wrote:
After light room what are your opinions highest image available size
 [/url
][url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20173/big_915_LRM_EXPORT_20170322_212117_1.jpg]
Last edited by dr.volkan on Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:01 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
Aha, this looks much more normal! But no sharpness. Is the lens soft or just doesn't work well on the Pentax?
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dr.volkan wrote:
Lets look if i can give normal sharpness
Last edited by dr.volkan on Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:30 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 2491
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
Like a lot of fast old primes it is soft wide open. Stopping down will help.
Is this the early version with 67mm filter thread or the newer with 49mm filter thread?
_________________
pentaxian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dr.volkan wrote:
| D1N0 wrote: |
Like a lot of fast old primes it is soft wide open. Stopping down will help.
Is this the early version with 67mm filter thread or the newer with 49mm filter thread? |
49mm it is very compact |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dr.volkan wrote:
| Pancolart wrote: |
| Some wild post processing there! Really hard to evaluate lens contribution that way. |
What isyour opinion after some work
I used raw converter Lr
And ps express
Before in camera editing was not good i think.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10525
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Lens seems good on crop & smaller sensors! I already know good "normal" lens for Aps-C.
Compare these photos with photos using a lens made for that camera. Because photos from that tiny sensor will not compare favorably from the other lens examples here made using larger sensors.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dr.volkan wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
Lens seems good on crop & smaller sensors! I already know good "normal" lens for Aps-C.
Compare these photos with photos using a lens made for that camera. Because photos from that tiny sensor will not compare favorably from the other lens examples here made using larger sensors. |
If the lens good pentax q performance is good
If the lens bad i cannot get any good results
For me this is more important to judge the lenses
Tomorrow i will use my smc macro takumar 50 mm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr.volkan
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Location: Turkey_istanbul
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dr.volkan wrote:
| dr.volkan wrote: |
| visualopsins wrote: |
Lens seems good on crop & smaller sensors! I already know good "normal" lens for Aps-C.
Compare these photos with photos using a lens made for that camera. Because photos from that tiny sensor will not compare favorably from the other lens examples here made using larger sensors. |
If the lens good pentax q performance is good
If the lens bad i cannot get any good results
For me this is more important to judge the lenses
Tomorrow i will use my smc macro takumar 50 mm |
Dear friends 35 mn is not 35 mm at pentax q10
It is 196mm f:2 and these are not close up photos
Handheld tele shots.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[/url
