Shots with a 31mm Limited Pentax lens

Discussion in 'Pentax' started by m II, Jan 30, 2007.

  1. m II

    m II Guest

    m II, Jan 30, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. m II

    m II Guest

    m II wrote:


    Sorry about that. I've just noticed some were taken with a K10D.




    mike
     
    m II, Jan 30, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. :m II wrote:
    :
    :
    : > I wish they were full size. Wonderful picture quality.
    : >
    : > http://www.pbase.com/carpents/eq_31f18
    : >
    : >
    : > 6 MP camera.
    :
    :
    : Sorry about that. I've just noticed some were taken with a K10D.
    :
    : mike

    Either way, those Pentax cameras seem to be about the best value for money
    in DSLRs right now. The new Professional (digital) series they are soon to
    release might turn the industry upside down if they are as good as these and
    as price friendly. The 31mm lens incidentally is a mystery to me. Nothing
    spectacular in it's ability when compared to other camera makers similar
    lenses but if it works for the owner, more power to him, I say.
     
    Doug MacDonald, Jan 30, 2007
    #3
  4. Andrew MacPherson, Jan 30, 2007
    #4
  5. m II

    Paul Mitchum Guest

    Which similar lenses from other makers are you talking about?
     
    Paul Mitchum, Jan 30, 2007
    #5
  6. :
    : > The [Pentax Limited] 31mm lens incidentally is a mystery to me. Nothing
    : > spectacular in it's ability when compared to other camera makers similar
    : > lenses but if it works for the owner, more power to him, I say.
    :
    : Which similar lenses from other makers are you talking about?

    Welllll... just about every camera maker has a 30mm lens in their stable. I
    can't quite grasp the significance of a Limited edition lens of this focal
    length. Maybe you can?
     
    Doug MacDonald, Jan 30, 2007
    #6

  7. Yes, that's dead right. It's called Sigma, and if you go back far
    enough, there was another 30mm made in the late 1960s and early 1970s -
    the Meyer Lydith wide-angle.

    A comprehensive list of all the others would be welcome, and the 30mm
    f2.8 CA Rokkor enlarging lens does not count.

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Jan 30, 2007
    #7
  8. m II

    John Francis Guest

    Really? Apart from the Sigma (reportedly not a bad lens at all) I can't
    come up with another 30mm (or 31mm) lens that's readily available.

    In any case, the "Limited" lenses aren't about focal length. The trio
    of FA Limiteds (31mm, 43mm & 77mm) are highly regarded for their smooth
    mechanical feel - much loved by manual focus afficionados. And while
    the 77mm seems to be the best of the bunch from an optical standpoint,
    the 31mm certainly isn't that far behind. If you think it's "nothing
    spectacular" then I can only assume that you've never used one.
     
    John Francis, Jan 30, 2007
    #8
  9. m II

    Paul Mitchum Guest

    There's also the 40mm and 21mm Limited pancake lenses, and a few more
    coming down the pike.

    But my point in asking wasn't about the focal length, either. I'm
    honestly curious to find out which lenses in the 30mm range would serve
    as well as the Limited, regardless of manufacturer or mount.

    I have this crazy idea that lenses are what make pictures, while cameras
    merely take them.
     
    Paul Mitchum, Jan 30, 2007
    #9
  10. m II

    Tony Polson Guest


    Pentax made a 30mm f/2.8 in K mount. It is highly regarded by Pentax
    afficonados, but is quite rare.

    Apart from the Pentax, and the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, which I think covers
    only an APS-C sensor, and the Meyer Lydith, which was sometimes sold
    as a 29mm, also in a version badged "Pentacon", I cannot recall any
    other 30mm lenses that have been made in the last 40 years.

    As for "just about every camera maker having a 30mm lens in their
    stable", you have to laugh. It is nonsense, pure and simple.


    (corrected version of earlier reply, deleted by persons unknown)
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 30, 2007
    #10
  11. And I did, in fact, chuckle slightly when it came by.

    On the other hand, a 28mm isn't that different, and nearly everybody
    *does* make one of those.

    I keep looking at the Sigma 30mm (in Nikon mount). A fast normal lens
    is darned useful. Still kinda expensive. And I still have some Sigma
    prejudice (though their 105mm macro has served me well).
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jan 30, 2007
    #11
  12. m II

    Tony Polson Guest

    That's true. However Pentax, which is the company in question, has
    made 28mm, 30mm and 31mm lenses! The 30mm (and 31mm) afficionados
    claim that 30mm (or 31mm) offers a perspective that is significantly
    different to that of a boring old 28mm lens. ;-)

    How accurate these focal lengths really are is also unclear.
    Perhaps not so expensive, when you consider how useful it can be on
    APS-C size sensors. From results I have seen, it has a pleasant
    rendition of out of focus elements of the shot. It's a nice lens.
    Sigma products are getting better. But there is always the
    uncomfortable feeling that your existing Sigma lens(es) may not work
    properly on your next camera body. It will take a long time for
    people to forget problems they previously had with Sigma lenses. :-(
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 30, 2007
    #12
  13. m II

    John Francis Guest

    Especially since Sigma products still seem to have problems; the
    latest Pentax body (the K10D) requires yet another upgrade to some
    Sigma flash units, and Sigma lenses *still* mis-identify themselves
    to Pentax cameras. I don't feel happy using Sigma products that
    contain any significant electronics on my Pentax DSLRs.
     
    John Francis, Jan 31, 2007
    #13
  14. m II

    Bandicoot Guest

    It isn't the choice of FL that makes the lens 'Limited'. It's the build
    quality - which is excellent - and the optical design (and, I suppose, the
    moderately high speed). The design is a more or less no holds barred quest
    for sharpness and overall contrast, with also very good coma control - this
    is a slightly different selection form the pick 'n' mix of which
    characteristics to optimise and at the expense of which others, making the
    Limited lenses distinctive from the rest of the Pentax lineup.

    To generalise grossly, the Limited are sharper and seem to me to have higher
    micro-contrast than other Pentax lenses, while other Pentax glass is
    optimised more for overall contrast and bokeh. (The Ghostless version of
    the SMC coating on the Limited lenses means that their overall contrast is
    close to that of other Pentax lenses anyway, despite being more optimised
    for micro-contrast.)
    Well, there's Pentax's own 30mm f2.8 K... This is a very fine lens, not as
    bitingly sharp as the 31mm or with such good closeup performance and coma,
    but with better bokeh and lovely colour.



    Peter
     
    Bandicoot, Jan 31, 2007
    #14
  15. m II

    Bandicoot Guest

    Well, I don't know about 28mm being boring, but 30mm does have a different
    feel to it - wider than a 35mm but it doesn't seem to have such extreme
    perspective as you get by 28, which makes it a nice 'street' lens. All this
    is subjective 'feel' of course - but it is my experience as an owner and
    user of all three FLs in question.


    Peter
     
    Bandicoot, Jan 31, 2007
    #15
  16. m II

    m II Guest

    I've just started using a Sigma 70-300 DG with my K100D and it talks
    well to the camera. I have had no focus problems or any lying about the
    aperture settings. My only complaint is that any picture with higher
    than normal contrast between two objects results in a slight bluish
    fringe around the outlines. I don't get that with any Pentax glass I own
    at those contrast levels.




    mike
     
    m II, Jan 31, 2007
    #16
  17. m II

    Tony Polson Guest


    Thank you, Peter, for helping to illustrate the point I was making.

    28mm is only "boring" because every manufacturer makes one. Truth is,
    there is no such thing as a "boring" focal length. It is the use to
    which a lens is put that determines how interesting it is.

    Having said that, the least useful (most boring?) focal length I have
    ever owned has been 135mm. It is too long for portraiture, and too
    short for true telephoto work. It is not sufficiently longer than an
    85, 90 or 105mm lens to make it distinctly different, yet it is long
    enough to produce portraits that are somewhat "flat" in comparison
    with those focal lengths.

    I have owned four 135mm lenses over the years. Pentacon, Olympus,
    Nikon, Leica. Optically, they have spanned the range between
    mediocrity (Pentacon f/2.8, Leica f/2.8) and excellence (Nikon f/2 DC,
    Pentax f/3.5 M). I have never produced a decent shot with any of
    them, nor with zoom lenses at the same focal length setting.

    Give me an 85, 90 or 105mm any time. Or a 180mm. But save the 135mm
    lenses for the japanese market where they are apparently very popular.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 31, 2007
    #17
  18. Yikes! I'd almost say you're displaying "slow learner" syndrome there. :)

    I never liked the ("classic") Nikon 105mm f/2.5; but I've only bought
    one 105mm lens since, and that was a macro lens which I do use a lot
    (almost entirely for closeup and macro)

    My first wideangle was a 28mm, and it never clicked for me. But I found
    myself using the wide end of a 28-90mm zoom a fair amount in the 1980s
    (which pushed me to buying a 24mm prime which I used a lot).
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jan 31, 2007
    #18

  19. The Meyer Orestor/Orestegon 29mm f2.8 was not any way like the tiny
    Meyer Lydith f3.5 30mm. I owned both. The Orestor was later badged just
    as a Pentacon lens, after the Lydith had gone out of production. It was
    always much larger, and a wider aperture, and performed rather better.

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Jan 31, 2007
    #19
  20. m II

    Tony Polson Guest

    More like terminal stubbornness! I refuse to like the 135mm focal
    length. I stopped trying years ago. ;-)
    Same here.
    I got to like the 24mm end of a 24-50mm AF Nikkor. I didn't like that
    lens, just the 24mm focal length. Luckily the 24mm f/2.8 Nikkor is
    one of Nikon's best lenses, so it was an easy decision to buy one.

    My favourite focal lengths are now 24mm, 35mm and ~90mm.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 31, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.