Dating ru 40mail ru 40inbox ru

posted by | Leave a comment

But the FA 50/1.4 is a great lens."While the Pentax 50/1.7 lenses (M, A, F, and FA) all appear to be essentially optically identical to each other (small coatings differences notwithstanding), it appears that the longer series of 50/1.4 lenses does not show quite the same uniformity.

While the Super Takumar, Super-Multi-Coated Takumar, SMC Takumar, SMC Pentax ("K"), SMC Pentax-M, SMC Pentax-A, SMC Pentax-F, and SMC Pentax-FA 50/1.4 lenses all have about the same configuration 6 groups of 7 elements (with visually indistinguishable lens diagrams) (ignoring coatings differences over time), Yoshihiko has pointed out previously that the 50/1.4 design underwent a little bit of "tweaking" at the time the A 50/1.4 was being developed.

Here is a question for you all who like F 50 mm lenses. I picked up one a while ago but do not do portraits very often. It is supposed to be very sharp, one of Pentax sharpest lenses.

Here is a question for you all who like F 50 mm lenses. I picked up one a while ago but do not do portraits very often.

The A, F, FA are same optically and any variations in sharpness are IMHO only from condition or batch variations." Comments.html#Normal Prime DET MTF data here shows resolution of FA f/1.4 and A f/1.7 to be virtually identical: have owned or used the Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4, the AF-Nikkor 50/1.4, the Canon EF 50/1.4, the Leica R 50/1.4 (the old one with the 55mm filter thread), a Yashica 50/1.4, The Leica M 50/1.4, and the Voigtlaender Nokton 50/1.5.

Although photodo rates the FA and F 50/1.4 differently (4.6 and 4.2), I simply don't believe them. The colors look a bit pale (almost like from Sigma 50 ART but not that bad) and at normal magnification, photos look a bit mushy.

The A, F, FA are same optically and any variations in sharpness are IMHO only from condition or batch variations." Comments.html#Normal Prime DET MTF data here shows resolution of FA f/1.4 and A f/1.7 to be virtually identical: have a bunch of many good lenses, including all FA Limiteds, FA* 24, FA*85, FA* 80-200 and DA* 55. It is fast, it has little vignetting and all kinds of distortion, it makes a very blurry background and it's also very sharp when you zoom at 100%. After a few years of owning the DA*55, I decided to buy the 43 Limited. It delivers great-looking images at normal magnification but it has an awful distortion and it's very unsharp at the corners. And this Zeiss is a jaw-breaking lens in this regard!

It was the old Photodo testing site that showed that the F 50s were a little sharper than the FA 50s (the normal lenses, not the 50 macros).

Optically the F and FA 50s were identical, both dating from the 70s. All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."' I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box! sort_order=views D[email protected]hotmail.com&thumbnails= Mike from Canada"I am not a great photographer! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."' I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box! sort_order=views D[email protected]hotmail.com&thumbnails= If you want to get technical, optically its identical to the K-series, the SMC Takumar, the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar and the second version of the Super-Takumar. Now that said there has apparently been a small tweak to the design somewhere along the line but the tweak is very small.

Leave a Reply

onlinedatingfornaturists com