hanhait

In my experience the central area the focus confirmation reacts upon is rather extended, and within that area he reacts on the closest point, or maybe the first point that is in focus.

As they say "busy bokeh", looks quite extreme. But not only that: do I see some ghost images as well ? Is the 35 mm / 2.4 derived from this one ? I hope not.

Stunning ! It says 1/10000 s exposure time erroneously.

Beautiful, but also a bit too dark and sad for my taste. #3: she and the portrait looking away from each; as if they just divorced.

I'm sorry to say I find them not too appealing, a bit muddy in many aspects, lacking contrast in picture and subject. For me the ones with the railway in B/W work best because of the graphical ...

It was intended as half joke: if you must rotate the camera around 3 axes it can be physically awkward or impossible with a tripod attached.

It is very odd to give a low score because you don't like the focal length. The focal length and aperture are given and if you claim to review a lens you have to assess the quality based on that: ...

Perfect recipe. Just for the calibration you better take the camera from the tripod. You cannot use your wireless remote. For the lenses you might enjoy old glass as it has an infinity setting. ...

Fine, 50x the focal distance, 20 x if that is not practicable. But for who do you - or the website - recommend this ? For the dpreview team : they might have considered this.  For simple ...

Like jahaakas I have the Tamron 10-24, purchased with high expectations. For reasons I cannot quantify I do not like it too much though. Distortion is not the point, but the images have something ...

You make nice blown-out highlights, I suppose any lens will give some colourful edges this way. Moreover this picture looks out-of-focus anyhow, another method to increase CA.

B&W as they are now. The extra details in the B&W could be brought in the color picture as well, and vice versa, so the choice is rather "which one" than a fundamental pro/anti color choice. I ...

The 16-85 is WR, longer range, bit better quality, has less CA especially. Except for some weight and volume reduction I see no reason for having a 16-45 if you have a 16-85 already.

Tamron 10-24 mm is available in Pentax mount. 2011 ?

Well, lenses/mirrors for telescopes do not care much about Bokeh, although even there some tricks are done to prevent that bright stars overshine weak planets. Also for microscopic lenses the main ...

I think it should be considered as a 20 mm lens, already reversed for you. You can save the messing around with reversal adapters, difficult focusing etc. Basically a good idea. It's a one thing-...

I'd use some small tape or marking pencil or whatever  and indicate where the 'real' infinity is on the lens. As you know this flaw you can easily take care and correct. At this focal length even ...

I went from a K100D the K-5 way a few years ago, although not the budget way: I purchased a K-5 new. It is 'better' in all respects, although just feelingwise it is somewhat more difficult to ...

I have the Tamron and the Pentax mentioned but use the Tamron seldom as its pictures have something unpleasant I cannot describe or quantify. Also the Pentax at 16 mm is really quite wide already.

Some old manual glass can be obtained cheap and may serve you well, especially as you can manually fix it at infinity. f 2.5/135, f4/200 mm, f4/300 mm can do a good job. The astrotracer is a good ...