Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Super Takumar 55/1.8 Samples
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:45 pm    Post subject: Super Takumar 55/1.8 Samples Reply with quote
I'm just getting around to mounting the old Super Tak on the new Sigma SD-14. So...here are some quick local shots.

Nothing fancy, very basic processing, but a pretty good indicator that the Super Tak is no slouch in the lens world!

Regarding the Sigma, I think that it provides some "dimensionality" to the overall image, which I like. It's a bit of a quirky camera to use, but I love the output.

Some of these are showing the noise a little, at 800ASA. Nothing that couldn't be wiped out with a noise program though.













PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That is good output from the Sigma, lovely color and even treatment. The Tak 55 is a damn nice lens.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank goodness, when there is no Vernal Equinox around these parts for two more months, we got you learning a new cam. I really need to see something green right now.
What do you mean, when you say the SD14 is quirky? I can’t shoot it as my Canon shoots?


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nesster wrote:
That is good output from the Sigma, lovely color and even treatment. The Tak 55 is a damn nice lens.


Thanks, I'm happy that the Foveon processor seems to show nice color, and with the slightly warm output of the Super Tak, I am overall pleased.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bruce wrote:
Thank goodness, when there is no Vernal Equinox around these parts for two more months, we got you learning a new cam. I really need to see something green right now.
What do you mean, when you say the SD14 is quirky? I can’t shoot it as my Canon shoots?


I'm glad that the green is showing nicely already this year. I have also seen some Daffodils coming up.

The SD14, so far, seems to need the Red channel toned down. I'm seeing the Reds as overblown in "normal" output. So the "quirk" is that I either use the in-camera control to lessen the overall contrast OR tone down the Red channel in Photoshop.

Another "quirk" is that I seem to have better results in the final image if I push the RGB channels to the far right, and even beyond, in the Histogram. The RAW program draws the details out of the "blown" areas and all seems to come out well. The big SURPRISE to me is that the Foveon sensor apparently transmits much more information from the light values. Where I wouldn't usually expect much from any blown out areas, there is actuallly a lot there.

No real mechanical quirks though. I DO like that the shutter lag is virtually nonexistent.

But back on the quality of the Super Takumar 55/1.8...I frankly don't feel that this lens will ever leave my collection. It always exhibits warm, clean images that are extremely sharp from f:2.8, and though slightly softer wide open, it is actually almost too sharp for a portrait wide open.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 5:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurence
That is quite an advocacy of the foveon. Keep them coming with some other lenses as well. All the product I see in this forum and elsewhere makes it a real shame that the sensor is not more readily available.


patrickh


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The ferns are particularly impressive.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice work Larry. It will be interesting to hear your thoughts on this camera as time goes on.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Beautiful colour rendering with these - and I agree, it's a wonderful lens to have.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Foveon and Takumars is unbeatable combination. Esp. in hands of skilled photographer, like Laurence Smile


PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very good shots and colors! And sharpness...


PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
THANKS all you guys! I like the encouragement.

This is an odd sort of camera...well actually an odd
sort of sensor, but not in a BAD way. I can take shots
of the same subject either in Foveon RAW (.X3F) or in JPEG,
but not both at the same time.

The output is wildly different between the two modes
though. Shocked Although this is something that a photographer
might not want to happen, I actually kind of like it, as I can
post-process starting from two very different color bases.

I am surprised at the quality of ISO800 images, especially
hearing quite a few "horror stories" of anything over ISO400.

Here is a quick snap of a Christmas Cactus at ISO 800 and
the Pentax 55/1.8 (equivalent to a 93mm lens). I like that the
colors here are absolutely correct in relation to the "real world"
seeing through my own eyes.

Bear in mind that I haven't done much to this image, it is really
just a snapshot, but I wanted to show the ISO 800 output as a
base for me to render further in Photoshop.

The in-camera sharpening was used here, and it is a bit
"too much" for my tastes, so I'll more than likely turn off
any sharpening on most images from here on out.

Also, I think that the in-camera sharpening caused some
halos and some dark outlines in various areas, as well as
some wonky gradations of color.

Still learning, and it's a lot of fun working with such a different
kind of sensor output.

I'll load the RAW X3F file later and work on it in Sigma Photo
Pro, and show the comparison to this "rough" image.

Sigma SD-14
Super Takumar 55/1.8 lens
f:2 and 1/50th


PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think story of noise levels that you hear depend a lot on your expectations and experience.

The point & shoot brigade would be impressed with the level of noise in your photos, but the full frame users would be horrified.

What noise program do you use? Noise Ninja with the correct camera profile impressed me (although getting the exposure spot on, not boosting the levels in post and not adding any sharpening really help).


PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh, and any tips on getting the Xmas cactus to flower and not drop it's buds greatly appreciated! Laughing


PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurence wrote:
THANKS all you guys! I like the encouragement.

This is an odd sort of camera...well actually an odd
sort of sensor, but not in a BAD way. I can take shots
of the same subject either in Foveon RAW (.X3F) or in JPEG,
but not both at the same time.

Let me do a minor correction. When you take shots in RAW, the camera saves JPEG image to RAW file, too. If you open X3F file in Sigma Photo Pro, you'll see instantly an image, but the program is working for a few seconds and THEN the image changes. The first image, you saw, is embedded JPEG image. After the RAW conversion proces is done, you see the RAW image instead of the JPEG.

You also see JPEG if you view your shots in-camera and zoom them. Until you zoom them, you see embedded low-resolution BMP file (preview).

So... the JPEG is used for 3 purposes: Viewing the images in camera, histogram (yes, histogram is based on the jpeg image, so real RAW can store more dynamic range, than the histogram shows) and preview for SPP (before the RAW is loaded).

There are several utilities you can use to extract JPEG image or BMP thumbnail. The easiest to use is X3F.exe:

http://photoweb.xf.cz/temp/_del/x3f.zip

As I remember, the JPEG is slighlty cropped (a few pixels), so resolution is not the same as RAWs.

Laurence wrote:
The output is wildly different between the two modes
though. Shocked Although this is something that a photographer
might not want to happen, I actually kind of like it, as I can
post-process starting from two very different color bases.

According to my experience, the main difference is between noise (JPEG is noisier, mainly in color transitions) and in reds (RAW has more grave red, but it's dynamic range is a bit wider, while JPEG has more violent red, but its dynamic range is lower).

Laurence wrote:
I am surprised at the quality of ISO800 images, especially
hearing quite a few "horror stories" of anything over ISO400.

Depends on light and correct exposure. You can get noisy image even at ISO100, if the light i low and the image is underexposured. But you can get usable results at ISO800 if you have enough light and exposure is correct.

New firmware versions and SPP updates did a lot for noise reduction. The problem is that reviews are very old and any single website didn't retest it.

Few months ago, I discovered quite usefull thing: If the RAW images suffers from color noise (esp. in color transitions), which can't be removed by typical noise reduction software (neat-image, noise-ninja etc.), try Photoshop:

filters / noise / reduce noise:

strength = 0
sharpen details = 0
remove jpeg artifacts = off
reduce color noise = 35-50%

It can slightly impact colors (depending on image character), but color noise will get almost desaturated.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
I think story of noise levels that you hear depend a lot on your expectations and experience.

The point & shoot brigade would be impressed with the level of noise in your photos, but the full frame users would be horrified.

What noise program do you use? Noise Ninja with the correct camera profile impressed me (although getting the exposure spot on, not boosting the levels in post and not adding any sharpening really help).


Hi Martin: I currently don't use a noise program, other than the tweaks available for noise in Photoshop.

On the Christmas Cactus - Add a bit of pure nitrogen fertilizer twice yearly. I think that nitrogen is the first ingredient listed on a bag of fertilizer so for example: 1-0-0...the nitrogen normally goes right to the "green" parts of the plant for use, and since the flower depends on a "green" part of the plant in order to "hang on", the nitrogen makes it able to do so. At least that's what my grandfather always told me...and it has worked very well. Just don't over-fertilize - twice a year perhaps now and then maybe in August, and just a little handful scratched into the soil and watered in.

Regarding watering: Don't water too much or the plant gets too weak. A good rule of thumb is to go by "weight" of the potted plant - you can tell when it is getting quite dry. And you want to LET it get quite dry, then water well (best bet is to put in a dish of water to absorb upward). This method actually sort of stresses the plant, and that initiates better blooming.

Hope that helps you!


PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WOW no-X, THANKS for the great information, and for taking the time to delineate it for me. That was very nice of you. I learned a lot just reading your paragraphs, and that is what makes it all fun.

I like this camera so far, and it is a sort of challenge to work the RAW and JPEG files to get them to where they are in "real life".

Regarding the workmanship of the SD-14, I again had read accounts that the camera was "not too robust". However, that doesn't ring true for me. I think that this camera has a nice heft and mass, and also looking at the seams, they seem very well aligned. I have a sense that the camera can take a lot of rough use.

One nice touch is the rubber cover over the input/output ports - it snaps down SOLIDLY into place, and you actually have to push it down on the borders to know that it is locked in - very nice.

A disconcerting feature is that my nose tends to contact the LCD screen, but I am acquiring a LCD protector.

Again, no-X, THANK YOU.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Your welcome!

My LCD screen is permanently dirty, but I use it only for histogram checking and sometimes to check accuracy of focusing, so I don't solve it Smile

I use the power-grip together with the SD14. I bought it together with another battery, but unfortunately it was Minolta battery - the parameters are compatible, but dimensions are very slightly different, so it's not easy to put it out from the grip (the battery is sligtly thicker). Anyway, I bought another battery from Ansmann and this one fits perfectly - I can recommend this brand.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1