A snap photo with Pentax A28/2.8

Snaping around with my A28, I use non-finder shots most of the time, and by that I don't have much really in-focus shots. With this shot, I am able to slow down and focus on the subject. Wow, it's very sharp. This shot was shot at f/5.6, not really the sharpest apeature.

I have no doubt about this lens's optics performance.

DA21/3.2 - two more test shots

Unprocessed 100% crop (click on the image to see full size):


The color is very good, staturated by not overly cartoon.

I only shot jpeg in this two shots, and my istD is infamous of it's soft jpeg. See the cloth texture is rendered in the unprocessed 100% crop: it's nice and I am sure it will be much better with later Pentax DSLR's jpeg.

one side commend: I don't have any complain with the 'soft' jpeg. I agreed with luminous-landscape that the 'softness' is actually non-aggressive (and non-distruction) approach of the istD's in camera processing. It just leave the photofrapher more room in post editing.

Will post more sample when I've shot some better picture in RAW.

Snap with Pentax A28/2.8

On a Pentax DSLR, the view angle of the A28/2.8 is equilvant to a 42mm on 135 film body, which is a very classic focal length. A 40 or something focal length is the 'normal' lens in the old days and many camera such as Rollei 35S or a lot fixed lens rangefinders were equipped with a lens of similar focal length.

Still remember how Pentax advertised when it launch the FA43/1.8 limited? Pentax said the 43 is the true normal lens for 135 film. To the same reckoning, 28mm should be the true standard lens on DSLR body.

Before I get the DA21/3.2, I very often use my old A28/2.8 as a small lurk snap setup. My snap with this lens are not very successful because the streets in Hong Kong is quite tightly packed, and I often wanted a wider lens. In a spacious environment, however, the view angle of the 28mm is just great.

Another problem is MF. To me, AF is important in snap shots because I take a lot of off-finder shots. I can adjust the focus to approx. 3m or 2m without looking at the camera or lens, that just took me a little practice. But that's only an approximation. I still took a lot of out-focus shots.

Someone said you can use zone focus technique with the 28mm on a DSLR. I tell you, you will not be satisfy with the image quality. First of all, the Depth-Of-Field scale on the lens was for film, not APS size CCD. A quick calculation of DOF tell me I should give 1 more stop down (ie. when read the f/8 scale on the lens, I should use f/11 to shot). secondly, the DOF pinciple only hold true when you view the photo 'normally'. ie. at approx. 4R size on your screen. Don't you have the temptation to view the image at 100% pixel view? I did. The DOF is much more strict at 100% view and even it's within the DOF, it's not sharp enough.

So how good or bad is the image from the Pentax A28/2.8? I am sorry that I cannot conclude about this. I mainly use this lens for street snap (st. doc), which I always shot in jpeg. My quick shoting habit in snap and the softness of my istD's jpeg prevent me to judge the image quality.

I will try to dig out some correctly focus picture and post in this blog again as sample photos.

Pentax DA 16-45/4 EDAL

 

  

3 Years ago, I almost jump to Nikon when I decided to buy a DSLR. The Nikon D70 was much cheaper than the istD I am using now, and I always Nikon as a good system for digital.

the DA 16-45/4 changed my mind. I opt for the Pentax DSLR just because of this lens.

It was and still is the widest affordable standard zoom lens for digital. Yes you can choose a 17-40 with the full frame Canon DSLRs, but the price is out of question for me.

It gives very good image quality. Maybe it cannot beat a real good prime lens, but there is not much difference especially in terms of resolution. Before I bought it, I google it and find someone did a very scientific test with it against the Canon 17-40/4 L and concluded they are on par. But the Pentax is half the price of the Canon.

On the negative side, the DA16-45/4 is high contrast, so don't expect too much with the shadow details. It also tends to underexposure more serious than my other lens, but that's just my feeling - no test done. It quite heavy, and it's big.

I seldom use this lens on serious landscape or sceneic shots. But this is my most used lens in travelling and family / social gathering. It spent some great moment with me, and it's part of my daily life. Ain't that's what photography meant for?

I have briefly compare it with the DA 18-55/3-5-5.6 kit lens. It beat the kit lens in image quality, hands down. A lot of people can't understand the difference between 16mm and 18mm. I tell you, it's a lot. The relationship between shoting angle and focal length is not linear, it a tangent scale.

I will use my DA21/3.2 or FA*24/2 when I lurk around and snapping. But I will definitely use DA16-45/4 at family, social gathering, hiking or business trips, and add a tele-zoom when I go to travel with my family.

Pentax DA14/2.8

 
 
 

Why I buy this? The Pentax DA 14/2.8 is smaller and cheaper than all competitors. Period. Yes, all other compeitors are designed for a full-frame coverage on 35mm film. But I will not use the lens on film anyway. Why should I care?

I get this lens immediately when I knew it arrived Hong Kong (and paid a premium price natually).

The legendary SMC coating on Pentax lens can substatially reduce flares and ghost images, which is particularly important in ultra-wide lens. The DA14/2.8 isn't 100% flare free, but it's already excellent. The sample photos clearly demonstrate how good this lens handles direct sunlight.

Just as other DA lens, the DA14/2.8 is a bit contrasty than old-days Pentax MF lens. It's not a problem, it's just the characteristic of the DA lens. I personally don't find any problem with this because it actually looks better screen.

Distortion control is also very good. But that's pretty much expected for a fix-focal length ultra-wide lens. If not, everyone will goes for a ultra-wide zoom instead.

My only complain is the size and weight. But how can I expect more from a ultra-wide lens? So it's only my personal comment.

Many people compare this lens with the Pentax DA12-24/4 zoom lens. I havn't use the 12-24, so can't really comment. Judge from the photos I've seen on the web, the 12-24 is also a great lens with very good distortion and flare control. In general, ultra-wide lens are difficult to frame (when you wants a really good picture), and it's certainly much easily to frame with a zoom than a fix-focal length. Fix focal length has advantage over zoom lens in distortion, flare control, and larger apeature.

My advise for those who can't decide between 12-24 or 14 is: go for the zoom if you can decide. If you really appreciate the advantage of a ultra-wide fix-focal lens, you won't be un-decided. And, congratulations! You are a real master photographer! For the record, I will be unable to decide between the 12-24 and the 14 if both were available 2 years ago, when I purchase the DA14. 

FA*24/2 wide open

At wide open, the 24/2 is quite soft. The bokeh render the light source into slightly donut shape, which is normally not desireable. However, the lens still give very good color and the vignetting is acceptable. Nevertheless, f/2 at 24mm is considered as very fast, and the little drawback should be acceptable because when you need the speed at wide angle, it's the only choice in Pentax.

I havn't compare it with other 24/2 lens thou.

 
  

Exposure compensation with Pentax PTTL system

I was always confuse by the 2 EV compensation on the camera and on my Pentax AF360FGZ flash. Done a small test recently, and I can now confirm that:

The EV compensation dial on the flash controls the power of the flash light.
The EV compensation on the camera controls the exposure of ambient light.

Too bad Pentax never mention this important point in their user manual. Not surprise to me because Pentax usually do a very bad job in their manual.

The test photos below are not a very good demonstration of the 2 EV compensation, because teddy was also lit by the ambient light as well. But it's good enough to support my conclusion.

Note that the 3rd photo did not have an 2EV under exposured background, because the shutter would be faster than sync speed. The 3rd photo actually under-exposured the background by 1EV. See the data. The fifth photo used HS mode and successfully under-exposured the background by 2EV.

Pentax FA24/2

At 24mm f/2 max. apeature, it should make itself a great lens for snap around with the APS-size digital SLR.

But it's not.

The fact that it's heavy, bulky, and shining silvery color make it very intruding and not suitable for snap. I actually have mine made black using spray paint and black duct tape. See Here.

It also focuses slowly. Although it's an IF design, the on-camera motor is unable to fast focus the heavy lens elements. Yes I can use zone-focus when I need fast action, but it's only approximation. When you need something sharp, you just don't get it with zone-focus.

The infamous hybrid aspherical element is also a problem. My 24/2 is over 10 years age, and it get problem in it's hybrid element. The result: low contrast and heavy flare when face strong light source. It's not much a problem in DSLR thou because I can easily tinkle the contrast with the level command. But it'll still degrade the overall picture quality because the level actually flatten out the image data, and the overall details in the picture will be reduced.

Regarding the picture quality, the lens does give a rather soft image at f/2 and probably f/2.8; but it starts to be very sharp at f/4 and smaller apeatures. Well, it's expected for any large apeature lens but at wide-open, this lens just can't compare with the flagship limited lens from Pentax like the FA31/1.8 limited. You won't see the problem on film, but it just don't deserve the FA* designation when you use it on digital - you can easily enlarge the picture and view it on your 19" screen.

The FA24/2 is very hot on the auction sites now, and I've seen some biddings in Japan Yahoo goes to close to US$1,000. Totally outrages in my opinion. US$300 or $400 for a 2nd hand one probably still worth it because it's the only large apeature wide-angle from Pentax. But that's it.

First trial of Pentax DA 21/3.2

The form factor of this lens is great for snap. Finally, the great old feeling of snaping with my Contax G2 with Biogon 28/2.8 is back. The size and weight of my istD+DA21 combo is a bit bigger and heavier than old day G2, but it's small enough for me.

The focus speed of the lens is great, and I can actually use AF when snap around. I know about zone-focusing, but that's only approximation. If AF works, I'd rather use AF.

The image quality of the lens is very good. I don't have time to really test it yet, but judge from my quick snaps in jpeg, the image quality of this little baby can stand shouder to shouder with any other good Pentax prime.

Yes, DA21/3.2 is expensive. But I don't mind it and sure it will be my most used prime lens.