It's going to be an interesting device, I'm thinking about buying that myself.
W5JCK: Not sure what universe you people live in. A sharp lens with good IQ does NOT capture photos that look like a watercolor painting!
...or to aggressive NR, pretty common in mobile phones for obvious reasons.
Madrid, BTW ;-)
Favorable Exponynt: No Pentax no sale (free after Mr. Bob Marley).
Yeah I have one underway :)
@Favorable ExponyntDunno... is Lomography still producing some?
Other than that I don't think anyone is currently producing M42 cameras anymore...
Need we tell you what the difference is? (rolleyes)
Yake: The usual comments are that you can find some old lens for the cost of a coffee and it will do the same thing. But good luck finding those old lenses in all of these mounts, free of scratches and fungus, etc. I'm glad they're making these. Some people will make good use of them.
I've had wonderful experiences in Russia and Japan (different lens categories ofc), with pristine items that really were "new" or "as new" (checked thoroughly) for a fraction of the going price.Quite a bit of scouring is necessary, of course.
Not really good luck, it's pretty easy if you know where to look and/or you happen to travel regularly to the countries where they can be found easily.
Jonathan F/2: More overpriced hipster lenses by Lomo? Just buy a Helios 44 for $30-40 and get the better OOF bokeh effects, sharper glass and all for a fraction of the price!
I find it mildly bemusing that some people are rushing to buy a modern knock-off of a vintage lens for a ridiculously high sum...
I don't have anything personal against Lomo, it could even be my thing to shoot with a vintage lens (I'm doing that just now BTW), it's just sad to notice that this world has become the hunting territory for enterprises with an m.o. bordering on scamming, and they are really successful in making big money, while real talents and serious commercial propositions often die in little time only because they don't spray dazzling words all over the place, but just offer something realistic at a realistic price.
People just prefer to fall for the talk and be scammed believing they are onto something mystical rather than buying something ordinary that (gasp!) works.
@CopCarSSI can't think of any car company making a car with a hand-crank start either...
Exactly my point, post liked.
Peiasdf: Wouldn't a paper cutout in front of a 80s' cheap lens have the same effect? I remember DigitalRev did something like this years ago.
That is, where the diaphragm should be.This lens doesn't have a diaphragm *and* then the slot-in apertures (it only has the latter), while the old lenses you were refering to already have some kind of aperture mechanism.
If you scroll to the second set of pictures there's a 3D render.
It's ideal if the aperture shape is cut like you want, but you get the same effect the way you say.
M1963: I would never buy this lens, but it can't be measured against conventional lenses and mustn't be judged the way some readers do. This is not about sharpness and colour accuracy - it's about creating a certain look for the pictures.In the beginning of the 20th century, photographers like Edward Steichen, Alfred Stieglitz and Alvin Langdon Coburn would look for unsharp lenses - I mean, lenses that gave them the kind of slightly hazy images they sought after. It was a matter of expression. By today's standards those pictures are mushy and lack definition, but who can deny their importance?This lens doesn't aim at pixel peepers. It's for people who want a certain look to their photographs. You should try to understand not everyone craves for accuracy and sharpness. Sure, I hate those effects as much as you do, but if people like them, why shouldn't they have it? Photography is a broad church and photographs are the offspring of the photographer's individuality.
Because the same effects (except maybe the ones related to the slot-in aperture) can be had with lenses that cost twenty bucks.
Plenty of really nice old lenses for pennies, and awesome glass too...Something that you can use wide open to get unusual effects and stop down a little to get all the DoF and sharpness you need, all topped-up with nice and peculiar color rendition.
No need to dig much to find lots of good examples...
Keith Cooper: With a lot of people new to the software I hope this info is of help. I still use them regularly, with Sharpener Pro being a frequent part of my print workflow from small snaps to 3 metre prints. I've written up details of how I use many of the plugins.
Hope it helps?
Silver Efex Prohttp://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/silver_efex_2.html
Color Efex filtershttp://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/color-efex-pro4.html
SFX and haloshttp://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/photo-tips/sfx-halo.html
SFX with dull colour imageshttp://www.northlight-images.co.uk/tutorial_pages/sfx-colour.html
Very informative and detailed, thanks for sharing.
Fantastic news on one side, terrible on the flip side...Just sad that they are abandoning one of the better plugin suites on the market, if not the best one...
LensBeginner: Am I very much mistaken, or that's Himeji Castle? :-)Also, the Jibo Kannon statue at Aizu.
Oh I see.. TY very much!
Am I very much mistaken, or that's Himeji Castle? :-)Also, the Jibo Kannon statue at Aizu.
(unknown member): SNR and DR are noticeably better than D810. This is based on RAW file analysis from firmware Ver. 0.38(January 2016).
A beta tester using more recent firmware posted his conclusion that K-1 is about 1 stop better in SNR than the D810 below in the comments. I can not confirm this with quantifiable data at the moment of course but DxO will post the final results in few weeks.
I wouldn't trust DxO on this one... IMHO they are somewhat biased...