Friday, September 24, 2010

FA☆ 24: to infinity or just about 30 feet

I think I got a lemon.

I don't get a focus confirmation with distant objects. Set the lens to AF, let it go to the intersection and it just hammers against the infinity stop.

Set it to MF, f8, put it so the camera will fire, take a shot:
From 24 experiments

From 24 experiments

Those look right to you? The grass near the bottom 1/4 line of the shot seems to be the sharpest thing.

FA☆ 24: focus

Here goes.

43mm @ 1.9, no focus correction:

24mm @ 2.0, no focus correction:

24mm @ 2.0, focus correction enabled and set to +7 for this lens:

24mm @ 2.0, focus correction set to +10:

Crops of the three 24 shots, off, +7, then +10:

And I'll tell you, I walked around a little earlier and it's field relevant - without the adjustment, I'm pretty consistently behind my subject:

(focus confirmation was for the foreground leaves.

Well, it's here

From Mobile '10

I've been playing around with it and have learned a couple of things:

1) This lens feels incredible on the camera. It is the best balance piece of equipment I have ever owned, without question. I actually like the feel more than that of the 77.

2) It is SOOOOOOFT wide open. Eh.

3) The autofocus/manual focus declutch works great, though I'm not yet convinced of its utility on a lens with such a short focus throw.

4) It backfocuses. Bad. I have the adjustment for the lens set to +7 (out of 10) and I'm thinking that's about right, but I actually had to print out a test chart to make sure it wasn't just something I was doing.

I'm going to be playing with it in context tonight and tomorrow; my hope is it shows some more positive character or else it's going back. The softness I could deal with, especially since it's considerably sharper by 2.5 and 2.8 seems as good as the K lens, but the focusing issues are a little on the inconsistent side and I'm pretty sure a lens I can't trust to focus correctly isn't worth $600. I am having trouble deciding if I got a bad sample or if I need to check out of this game and hope they sell a more modern lens in this class at some point in the future. The 21mm f3.2 just isn't enticing enough for its price.


From Mobile '10

This is what I carried to work with me today. 14/2.8, 24/2, 43/1.9, 77/1.8

Monday, September 20, 2010

I think I know how to solve the "normal zoom" problem

DA 18-135 f3.5-5.6.

Weather resistant, 7-blade rounded aperture, and it covers an extremely useful range of "I can't be bothered to pick lenses today."

Or I'll just save up for that DA* 16-50... oh here we go again.

Sunday, September 19, 2010


DA 50-200

DA 50-200

DA 50-200

DA 10-17 fisheye... at 17.

and my favorite of the batch:

DA 50-200.

I took the 43 with me but used it on only one picture that didn't work very well. Who needs normal?

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Thoughts on 24mm

I did my walk today, as I had said. I took a kit consisting of 14, 24, 43, 50 macro, and 77 with me (all fitting within my crumpler 3-slot bag... fear the Pentax system).

Of those lenses, I only used three - 24, 50, and 77. I forced myself to use the 24 more than the others, I think, at least for a more widely varied range of situations.

I will be posting a gallery, hopefully tomorrow, with all of the shots from today that weren't horribly blown out for not paying attention to metering. Some of them turned out quite nicely, I think, but I'd like critique on the basic: considering how I prefer abusing wide-angle lenses, what do you think?

More coming as it develops (ha ha get it it is a photo blog)

[edit] MORE HAS DEVELOPED! The picasa gallery is here.

Some highlights from the 24:

Monday, September 13, 2010

Something for your trouble

Have an early morning skipper, courtesy the 77mm lens:

Philosophical question

I have a 16-45 zoom lens.

I also have 14mm and 43mm fixed length lenses.

Now, without looking at a focal length analysis of the shots I've taken with that lens...

do I buy a 24/2 and sell the zoom?

or will I miss the lengths between 24 and 43?