MightyMike

Lives in Canada Brampton, Canada
Works as a Distribution and Logistics
Joined on Nov 11, 2004
About me:

Pentax K-1
Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL
Pentax DAL 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL
Sigma 24mm F1.8 EX DG Macro Aspherical
Sigma UC Zoom 24-50mm F4-5.6
Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5
Tamron SP 24-135mm F3.5-5.6 AF Aspherical AD IF Macro Model 190D
2x Magnicon MC 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 ED AL
Pentax FA 35mm F2.0 AL
Pentax DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited
SMC Pentax AF Zoom 35-70mm F2.8 for ME F
Pentax F 35-80mm F4-5.6
Pentax F 35-105mm F4-5.6 Macro
Pentax DA 40mm F2.8 XS
Pentax FA 50mm F1.4
Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 APO EX
Magnicon MC 70-210mm F4.5
Pentax F 70-210mm F4-5.6
Tamron 70-300mm F4-5.6 LD
Pentax FA 77mm F1.8 Limited Silver
Pentax F 80-200mm F4.7-5.8
Pentax F 100mm F2.8 Macro
Pentax FA 135mm F2.8
Sigma APO 100-300mm F4 EX DG
Tamron AF 100-300mm F5-6.3 Model 186D
Sigma APO 500mm F4.5 EX DG
-------------------------------------------------
Rokinon 8mm F3.5 Fish-Eye CS P/KA
Venus (Laowa) 12mm F2.8 D-Dreamer (Zero-Distortion) K/A Mount
Venus (Laowa) 15mm F4.0 1:1 Macro + Shift K-Mount Manual Aperture
Zenit MC MIR-20M 20mm F3.5 M42
Kiron 28mm F2.0 P/K
Tokina-Special 28mm F2.8 M42
2x SMC Pentax-A 28mm F2.8
Image Super Coated 28mm F2.8 P/K
Super-Takumar 28mm F3.5 M42
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 28mm F3.5 M42
SMC Pentax-M 28-50mm F3.5-4.5
Elicar Automatic 35mm F2.8 M42
Soligor Auto-Wide 35mm F2.8 M42
Schneider-Kreuznach 35mm F2.8 Edixa-Curtagon M42
3x Super-Takumar 35mm F3.5 M42
2x Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 35m F3.5 M42
Soligor 35mm F3.5 M42
Pentax 645-A 35mm F3.5
7x Super-Takumar 50mm F1.4 M42
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm F1.4 M42
2x SMC Takumar 50mm F1.4 M42
SMC Pentax-K 50mm F1.4
SMC Pentax-A 50mm F1.4
2x SMC Pentax-M 50mm F1.7
SMC Pentax-A 50mm F1.7
Ricoh AF Rikonen 50mm F2.0 P/K with Built in AF Module
2x Macro-Takumar 50mm F4.0 1:1 M42
3x Auto-Takumar 55mm F1.8 M42
Super-Takumar 55mm F1.8 M42
5x SMC Takumar 55mm F1.8 M42
SMC Takumar 55mm F2.0 M42
Vivitar 55mm F2.8 1:1 Macro P/K
Helios-44-2 58mm F2.0 M42
Helios-44M 58mm F2.0 M42
Asahi Kogaku Takumar 58mm F2.4 M37
Super Takumar-Zoom 70-150mm F4.5
SMC Pentax-A 70-210mm F4.0
Pentax 645-A 75mm F2.8
2x SMC Pentax-M 75-150mm F4.0
Vivitar 75-205mm F3.8 MC Macro Focusing Zoom P/K
Soligor 80-200mm F3.5 C/D M42
Rodenstock Rodagon 80mm F4.0 Enlarging lens
Helios-40-2 85mm F1.5 M42
2x Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 85mm F1.8 M42
Mamiya/Sekor SX 85mm F2.8 M42
2x SMC Pentax-K 85-210mm F4.5
2x Super-Takumar 105mm F2.8 M42
Pentax 645-A Macro 120mm F4.0
Samyang 135mm F2.0 ED UMC
Vivitar Series 1 135mm F2.3 M42
Auto Chinon 135mm F2.8 M42
Opticam Auto 135mm F2.8 M42
Soligor Auto-Tele 135mm F2.8 M42
Takumar 135mm F3.5 Chrome M42
2x Super-Takumar 135mm F3.5 M42
Zeniton 135mm F3.5 T-mount
SMC Pentax-M 135mm F3.5
Pentax 645-A 150mm F3.5
Super-Takumar 150mm F4.0 M42
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 150mm F4.0 M42
Bushnell Automatic 200mm F3.5 M42
2x Super-Takumar 200mm F4.0 M42
SMC Pentax-M 200mm F4.0
2x Pentax 645-A 200mm F4.0
Jupiter-21M 200mm F4.0 M42
Zeniton 200mm F4.5 T-mount
Tele-Takumar 200mm F5.6 M42
Tele-Takumar 300mm F6.3 M42
Soligor 450mm F8.0 M42 (T-mount?)

Raynox HD-6600Pro 52mm 0.66x Wide Angle Adapter
Raynox HD-7000Pro 58mm 0.7x Wide Angle Adapter
Soligor 2x TC M42
Sigma APO 1.4x EX DG
Pentax Rear Converter-A 645 1.4x
Bower K-mount 5x monocular adapter
Lens2Scope 10mm 1:4 EOS monocular adapter

Genuine Asahi M42 Ext. Tubes
Kenko PK-A Extension Tubes
Set of PK Extension Tubes

Sunpak Auto 224 D Flash
Agfatronic 280 CB Flash
Vivitar 2800 Flash
Vivitar 3500 Flash
Lenmar SBT36ZD Flash
Metz Mecablitz 58 AF-2 Digital
Gary Fong Lightsphere II Cloud C4
Gary Fong Lightsphere Collapsible Snoot with PowerGrid
4x Metz 60CT-1 Flash Systems
Opus Safe Sync
Vello 2.4Ghz Radio Trigger
3x Vello 2.4Ghz Receivers

Rollex 20
Zenit-E
Pentax S3
Pentax SV
2x Pentax Spotmatic F
Black Pentax ES II
Praktica LTL
Pentax K1000 (Brown Leather)
2x Pentax K2
2x Pentax MX
Pentax ME
Pentax ME F
Pentax Auto 110 kit, 18/24/50mm F2.8, winder, AF130P, Filters + hoods
Pentax Program Plus
Pentax P30t
Pentax 645
Fuji GSW690III
Pentax A3000
Pentax PZ-10
Pentax MZ-50
Pentax MZ-7

Previously owned cameras

Fuji Finepix 2800......................... 5000 pictures
Black Panasonic DMC-FZ20...20000 pictures
Silver Panasonic DMC-FZ30.... 3000 pictures
Black Panasonic DMC-FZ30...22000 pictures
Pentax K10D...............................33000 pictures
Pentax K20D...............................55000 pictures
Pentax K-7...................................34000 pictures
Pentax K-5 #1...............................5500 pictures
Pentax K-x...................................13000 pictures
Pentax K-5 #2.............................36000 pictures
Pentax K-5IIs..............................14000 pictures
Pentax K-3...................................54500 pictures

Comments

Total: 74, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

LingoDingo: This lens is designed to resolve the same detail as the FF lens but for an image area that is 1/4 of the size. In other words it has to be 2x as sharp as the FF lens.

You could always buy the FF lens and use it with a m4/3 adapter, but the performance would be a huge let down when compared to this new PL lens.

And then there is the DUAL IS performance. One YouTube reviewer is already reporting that they were able to get sharp hand-held shots as slow as 1/2 second with this new PL 200mm lens, something that I doubt could be achieved with a Canon or Nikon FF 400mm hand-held set-up.

To get a better idea about how the Panasonic 200mm f/2.8 lens should perform, lets take a look at how the Canon 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM FF lens compares with the Olympus 300mm f/4.0 ED IS PRO lens...

https://www.lenstip.com/211.4-Lens_review-Canon_EF_300_mm_f_4L_IS_USM_Image_resolution.html

https://www.lenstip.com/478.4-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_300_mm_f_4.0_ED_IS_PRO_Image_resolution.html

Hmmm...

No matter how you look at it, light gathering vs. total sensor noise, resolution vs enlargement magnification, DOF or FOV it all equates to the same result in the end, advantage for the same result goes to no system! You can only claim an advantage if remove the requirement for the same result.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 05:29 UTC
In reply to:

LingoDingo: This lens is designed to resolve the same detail as the FF lens but for an image area that is 1/4 of the size. In other words it has to be 2x as sharp as the FF lens.

You could always buy the FF lens and use it with a m4/3 adapter, but the performance would be a huge let down when compared to this new PL lens.

And then there is the DUAL IS performance. One YouTube reviewer is already reporting that they were able to get sharp hand-held shots as slow as 1/2 second with this new PL 200mm lens, something that I doubt could be achieved with a Canon or Nikon FF 400mm hand-held set-up.

To get a better idea about how the Panasonic 200mm f/2.8 lens should perform, lets take a look at how the Canon 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM FF lens compares with the Olympus 300mm f/4.0 ED IS PRO lens...

https://www.lenstip.com/211.4-Lens_review-Canon_EF_300_mm_f_4L_IS_USM_Image_resolution.html

https://www.lenstip.com/478.4-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_300_mm_f_4.0_ED_IS_PRO_Image_resolution.html

Hmmm...

Anyone who knows knows that lenses for smaller formats do need to resolve more, however all that resolution advantage goes out the door if you print or display at the same size as the smaller format has to be enlarged by the same factor as the resolution improvement. so if it resolves 2x better linearly you still end up with effectively the same result as a less resolving lens for a system that has a 4x larger format. So yes a higher resolving lens should cost more but the amounts more we see for m43rds goes beyond what I would call reasonable.

Now food for thought, you stick a 2x TC on it and make it cover FF and what do you have? a 400mm F5.6 and half the linear resolution, or take a 400mm F5.6 for FF and put a 0.5x rear converter on it (its possible to do but not necessarily viable) and you get a 200mm F2.8 with double the linear resolution.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 05:28 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: Ha ha ha ha. $2999, so I guess it is 4x better than the Canon 200 f/2.8L II, currently about $750. m4/3 makers are smoking crack, thanks Panasonic I needed a laugh.

Do you truly believe this was designed by Leica? Both Pana/Leica 25mm F1.4's for the 43rds and m43rds systems were designed by Sigma according to the Sigma owned patents on them. Not to mention many other but certainly not all lenses for 43rds and m43rds.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 05:13 UTC
In reply to:

Elfotografoalocado: Welp, for the price of this lens alone you can get a 7D Mark II with the 300mm F4 L IS and have money to spare, or the Nikon 300mm F4 VR and almost be able to afford a D500.
I guess it makes sense depending on how you organized your system, but if you are building a sports/wildlife system from scratch this lens doesn't seem the way to go.

Any aperture advantage is eliminated by the sensor disadvantage, you just can't get around physics. Now don't be jumping on me as I never said anything bad about the lens or m43rds just putting it into perspective that there is no advantage! On a further not if a wildlife photographer can put up with lower sensor image quality to use a smaller system then they could have simply used a slower lens in their original system (if available) and obtained similar results in both weight and image quality.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 17:32 UTC
On article Leica Thambar-M 90mm F2.2 sample gallery (214 comments in total)

The emperor's new clothing comes to mind!

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 17:18 UTC as 68th comment
In reply to:

Mssimo: 50mm a copy of the sigma art? Seems like Pentax been rebranding lenses and it’s not a bad thing.

5 hours ago you said it looks like the old Tamron which pretty much infers that you thought it was a rebadge...

"Kirk Bruner
Yeah, the 11-18 looks just like the 11-18 re-branded and sold by Sony."

You must have forgot you wrote that comment or are embarrassed that you totally got the apertures wrong and don't want to admit you goofed because you were too quick with your anti-Pentax prejudice.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 02:13 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: $1200 for 17mm lol while Panasonic Leica 15mm is ONLY $500?

Or one askes when they see a photo, what do I need on my system to achieve the same or a similar result, do you really think after I see a wonderful photo with an F1.2 lens on a m43rds system that I must have an F1.2 lens on a totally different system to achieve the same result? Find me an F1.2 lens for medium format or large format, good luck! that doesn't mean I can't achieve the same result as a smaller system format achieved with an F1.2 lens.

I agree however some of it is snobbery, and against the snobbery and assumed snobbery you get aggressive defensiveness. However some of us just do the calculation to know what option they have in their chosen system that is similar.

F1.2 is a heck of a lot different when you take into account the difference in image circle that is being projected.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 04:19 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: $1200 for 17mm lol while Panasonic Leica 15mm is ONLY $500?

You just can't get away from it whether you're shooting an 8x10 view cameras or a cell phone to obtain nearly identical results you need the "equivalent". Interestingly my FA35mm F2.0 has just 5 elements and only one is aspheric, it also has ghostless coating making flare a minor to non issue. By the arrangement of the elements on the Oly 17 I suspect the flare to be an issue. I'm sure the Oly will be a better lens than my 18 year old 35mm F2.0 but I can still achieve an equivalent result with my lens.

Have you never asked yourself when you see someone's photo and their settings what you'd need to do to achieve the same result on your completely different system?

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: $1200 for 17mm lol while Panasonic Leica 15mm is ONLY $500?

Sensor size is relevant in the final result which is why we consider all variables when benchmarking. Given similar or the same technology a FF sensor has a 2 stop overall advantage over m43rds WRT total image noise. In good light and non extreme situations this advantage is relatively insignificant, however in the extremes it can be a big difference. The Oly 17mm F1.2 may well be a very good lens, likely even a bit better than my Pentax FA 35mm F2.0, however my 35mm F2.0 on a K-1 is a more capable lens if I'm looking to get shallower DOF or a faster exposure, If we were to stand side by side and I were to shoot my 35mm and stop it down to F2.4 on my K-1 @ ISO6400 and lets say 1/100th sec and you shoot with your Oly and 17mm F1.2 at F1.2 and ISO1600 and 1/100th sec we'd end up with essentially the same result, nearly identical framing, noise, DR and DOF... continued on the next reply...

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 23:19 UTC

So design a lens with bad spherical aberration and call it a soft focus portrait lens LOL I think i could make my own with my limited knowledge of lens design :)

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:12 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

MightyMike: So your 85mm F1.4 with this adapter on a Q7 would be like having a 200mm F3.3 on a FF camera, Is it worth it?

A 50mm F1.2 would be like a 118mm F2.8 and a 135mm F2.0 would be like a 317mm F4.7...

Its up to the user to decide what works for them, sometimes the larger format with native lenses just works better IMO

Mike

F0.7 on a Q7 sensor at ISO100 is like F3.3 on a FF sensor at ISO2200... This is where the shutter speed, dynamic range, DOF, noise and exposure would match if the sensor technology and resolution were identical; allow some room for small differences. There is no magic bullet, for a certain result you need a certain size lens (excluding the wide angle benefits of short flange distance mounts)... 135mm F2.0 lenses are a certain size and to get the same result on medium format, APS-C, M4/3rds, 1" or smaller sensors the lens has to be the same size and the sensor must utilize the full image circle.

Manual focus alone will make using many modern lenses tough on the Q-series camera...

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 03:56 UTC
In reply to:

MightyMike: So your 85mm F1.4 with this adapter on a Q7 would be like having a 200mm F3.3 on a FF camera, Is it worth it?

A 50mm F1.2 would be like a 118mm F2.8 and a 135mm F2.0 would be like a 317mm F4.7...

Its up to the user to decide what works for them, sometimes the larger format with native lenses just works better IMO

Mike

It seems like this topic is irritating you more than it really should, Pretty much the majority use 35mm as a benchmark... most don't know what an 8.5mm F1.9 lens would be for a small sensor camera however tell them its similar to a 50mm in 35mm terms and it means something. Now whether you're APS-C, M43rds, 1" or smaller you can take FF equivalents and convert them to your desired system... That 200mm F3.3 for example is like having a 100mm F1.7 on m43rds, so all I'm asking is does such a lens interest you? Is it worthwhile to you to combine the 85mm F1.4, adapter and a Q7 to get access to that focal length and aperture? So its not about FF but its about not duplicating if the option already exists in your preferred format size. Also note that it doesn't matter what format size you prefer you cannot make an adapted lens any more capable in DOF control or focal length than what it is capable of on its native format.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 14:26 UTC

So your 85mm F1.4 with this adapter on a Q7 would be like having a 200mm F3.3 on a FF camera, Is it worth it?

A 50mm F1.2 would be like a 118mm F2.8 and a 135mm F2.0 would be like a 317mm F4.7...

Its up to the user to decide what works for them, sometimes the larger format with native lenses just works better IMO

Mike

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 04:04 UTC as 43rd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

MediaArchivist: "...focus and aperture controls are all handled manually."

If the aperture is fixed at f/8, what controls are there for "aperture controls"?

If you want aperture control cut out a donut shape and paste it to the front of the lens LOL

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 15:01 UTC
In reply to:

Koenemans: An f4 lens (and in such a small case!) isn't focused on professionals...rather enthusiasts, right?
And 24mm wide-angle lens while an equivalence of 35mm is written on the lens.

Ok Jadot, let me rephrase, lets simplify the A9 or A7-series into an action camera but with interchangeable lenses, would a 24mm F11 lens be your first choice? Nobody is expecting 24mm F1.8 out of an action camera but it could have maybe been a bit faster aside from being a little bigger, there are 135 format fast 20 and 24mm lenses that aren't that big, the Pentax K20mm F4.0, Voigtlander has a pancake 20mm F2.8, Ricoh had Pentax design them a pancake 28mm F3.5 for their 60th anniversary, I think there was a small Russian 24mm F4.0 as well. Sure each of these are designed for a larger flange distance but allowing the elements to nearly touch the sensor can make any of these lenses that much smaller. Maybe Sony is working towards something even more impressive, I'm not knocking the product, just thinking the lens could have been faster.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2017 at 18:29 UTC
In reply to:

Koenemans: An f4 lens (and in such a small case!) isn't focused on professionals...rather enthusiasts, right?
And 24mm wide-angle lens while an equivalence of 35mm is written on the lens.

So if I read this right the lens would be like a 24mm F11 on 135 format... If Sony were to bring out an pancake FE 24mm F11 for the A7 or A9 cameras for $1000 would that be worth it? Granted you aren't getting the ruggedness and the rest of the camera so it could be cheaper... but seriously Who'd buy that lens and call it professional. No doubt it be a fun toy to play with but its pretty limiting too.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2017 at 17:26 UTC

@Bhima78 Buy 10... then don't worry if you wreck one...

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 18:42 UTC as 24th comment

This test is useless, I decide the end result when I edit the image, not the camera, not the manufacturer or colour profile, not the default RAW settings... Now I may not be a total connoisseur of editing but I personally choose not to use default profiles and default settings, nor would I bother with a Jpeg engine at face value. Back when I shot Jpeg I'd turn all the settings to their minimum values to come out with the best possible latitude for processing. If you don't use RAW profiles like I don't then yes you can "Just Shoot RAW!". Now if you can somehow hide the Exif and resolution information and allow us who might take the test to edit the RAWs and then decide based on that what we like best it may have some meaning.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 04:26 UTC as 209th comment
In reply to:

piratejabez: Very interesting. I'm still pretty confused about the actual internal differences between this and standard helicoids, but it looks and sounds fascinating and I'm glad you shared it with us!

Yes i saw the diagram... 4 doublets goes a long way to making a higher quality result.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 01:17 UTC
In reply to:

melgross: More modern lenses use variable cams, and more than one, to move several groups of elements independently during focusing. In addition motors allow for variable movements. This results in excellent close focusing as well as infinity focusing. I’m not sure about whether that’s true for zooming as well.

Vignetting is caused by using a front set of elements that’s really too small, and not curved enough, so it doesn’t properly gather enough light for edges and corners. Stopping down increases the ratio of the front set and the f stop, resulting in less vignetting.

Vignetting is often added to a lens design to minimize aberrations like coma, its easier to correct vignetting in post than it is to fix detail ruined by nasty amounts of coma spread. the vignetting can be done at any element location in the design of the lens by simply making an element small enough to cut off the widest rays of light. Next time you use you ultra-fast prime with its 3+ stops of vignetting wide open, imagine had the designer let all the light at the edges of the frame make it to the film or sensor plane how bad the coma may actually be.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 01:10 UTC
Total: 74, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »