 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / July 2005Pentax *istD and catadioptic lenses
There are still several of the old faithful mirror lenses available, if you look hard enough, with the K mount for Pentax. My manual tells me zip and the Pentax site tells little more. They can be used, obviously in manual mode, with some restrictions. That's it. Nothing on what the restrictions are. I have no real need for a 750mm lens, beyond curiosity (the mirror lens group tends to be about 500mm, though Sigma does offer a 600mm that, I think, can be had with a K mount: I'm more inclined towards the Tamron 500 at the moment). Currently, my 100-300mm Pentax is under-used (no monopod and a disinclination to cart a tripod around the yard or elswhere the birds are), so I'm not up for total experimentation with greater length, but it might just be fun to play with, if it really works. Anyone tried that or something similar with a K mount lens? >There are still several of the old faithful mirror lenses available, if >you look hard enough, with the K mount for Pentax. My manual tells me >zip and the Pentax site tells little more. They can be used, obviously >in manual mode, with some restrictions. That's it. Nothing on what the >restrictions are. Actually, because they are fixed aperture lenses, they can also be used in aperture priority mode. If you try to use pre-"A" K-mount lenses in Av mode on a *ist-D you end up metering (and exposing) at full aperture, but that's not a problem with a fixed-aperture mirror lens. >I have no real need for a 750mm lens, beyond curiosity (the mirror lens >group tends to be about 500mm, though Sigma does offer a 600mm that, I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Anyone tried that or something similar with a K mount lens? I've seen several shots taken with those lenses on the *ist-D. They look pretty much as you would expect - the usual unpleasant donut-shaped bokeh on out-of-focus highlights - but apart from that they work just fine. I'd still recommend a support, though; 500mm hand-held is pretty ambitious, especially since the mirror lenses have relatively small apertures. > I've seen several shots taken with those lenses on the *ist-D. > They look pretty much as you would expect - the usual unpleasant > donut-shaped bokeh on out-of-focus highlights - but apart from > that they work just fine. I'd still recommend a support, though; > 500mm hand-held is pretty ambitious, especially since the mirror > lenses have relatively small apertures. Today I put a fairly old Tokina 500mm mirror lens on my *ist-DS and had nary a bad photo shooting at ISO 1600 in sunlight, with a monopod. Nice to have a 1/4000 shutter :^) I've also hand-held this lens as slow as 1/180 with occasional good results. The angle of view can be visualized by extending your arm out and holding up two fingers together... that's what the 500/750 lens will cover. My Tokina has proven very sharp, buit you have to focus carefully because of the shallow depth of field. Hyperfocal distance at F/8 is... 5,280 feet, yes that's a whole mile. Callng the donuts unpleasant is just a value judgement intolerant of different results from different technologies. Folding a 20" lens into a handy 3.5" package is a miracle, and the donuts come free :^)  SignatureAnti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA > > I've seen several shots taken with those lenses on the *ist-D. > > They look pretty much as you would expect - the usual unpleasant [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com > Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA Thanks, guys. It sounds like something worth biting on once I get the next more costly lens (most likely the Tamron 11-22mm)in the bag. Then the cat lens. Business before pleasure, though I think the Tamron is also going to be a pleasure. Now, if someone will come up with an 8mm that isn't a fisheye...shooting auto interiors is a PITA sometimes, and currently my short lens is a 16mm (16-45). The 11mm on the Tamron should do most of it, but there are times, and lighting situations, when something similar and faster might help, even if it's single length. > Now, if someone will come up with an 8mm that isn't a > fisheye...shooting auto interiors is a PITA sometimes, and currently my > short lens is a 16mm (16-45). Fisheye is actually a good choice for auto interiors. You may find that you prefer the fisheye projection to the corner "stretching" you get with extreme wide angle -- I do. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com > > Now, if someone will come up with an 8mm that isn't a > > fisheye...shooting auto interiors is a PITA sometimes, and currently my [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > -- > Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com Oof. The only fisheye I can find is the Sigma 8mm (for Pentax). $609. I'll need to be shooting more interiors than is the case right now. >Oof. The only fisheye I can find is the Sigma 8mm (for Pentax). $609. >I'll need to be shooting more interiors than is the case right now. You can use the Zenitar (16mm) or the Peleng (8mm), both Russian. The Zenitar is an exceptional performer, costs about $100 new. SignatureRegards John Bean > >Oof. The only fisheye I can find is the Sigma 8mm (for Pentax). $609. > >I'll need to be shooting more interiors than is the case right now. > > You can use the Zenitar (16mm) or the Peleng (8mm), both > Russian. The Zenitar is an exceptional performer, costs > about $100 new. Saw the Zenitar on ebay, but the 16mm didn't do much for me. I don't know how a 24mm fisheye would work, primarily, but I'm also leery of sending account numbers to a Russian recipient. Croatian? I don't recall what the guy was who was selling. I'll check around some, maybe find Peleng 8mm somewhere. There's not much rush anyway, though at 100 bucks, I'll probably get that before I get the 11-22mm. > > >Oof. The only fisheye I can find is the Sigma 8mm (for Pentax). $609. > > >I'll need to be shooting more interiors than is the case right now. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > find Peleng 8mm somewhere. There's not much rush anyway, though at 100 > bucks, I'll probably get that before I get the 11-22mm. I bought the 8mm Peleng from the Kiev website. Very straightforward - honest dealer, good price. FedEx *almost* stuffed up the shipping, but the Kiev dealer straightened it out on time. No problems, and my genuine recommendation. The lens? Really cool. Fully 180° horizontal coverage. Distortion -of course- at the edges, but heck! Its a fisheye. For the price, a *brilliant* addition to the box. Manual focus and manual aperture. It *seems* to me that it consistently underexposes with my 1st*DS, but that is probably down to the fact that all outdoor shots contain more sky than I would usually include. 1.5 stops compensation fixes this. Pentax K mount is included. EXIF doesn't recognise the lens - records it a 0.0mm focal length. Hell. $220? Spare change for a lens like this. The edges are clipped, but the frame is mostly rectangular. Long edges are straight, short edges almost completely curved. I believe that it exposes a fully circular frame on 35mm. (Haven't tried yet). -- Jeff R. > > > >Oof. The only fisheye I can find is the Sigma 8mm (for Pentax). $609. > > > >I'll need to be shooting more interiors than is the case right now. [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > straight, short edges almost completely curved. I believe that it exposes a > fully circular frame on 35mm. (Haven't tried yet). Yeah, $220 ain't much for a top notch lens, or one that's nearly top notch. But it is one of three I feel I need, starting with the 11-22mm, and adding in the 500mm cat. Again, not major prices, but we're looking at something around $900 total, delivered, which I happen not to have to spare at the moment. The mirror lens will be the last, the Peleng fish-eye the middle. Thanks for the info guys. > >Oof. The only fisheye I can find is the Sigma 8mm (for Pentax). $609. > >I'll need to be shooting more interiors than is the case right now. > > You can use the Zenitar (16mm) or the Peleng (8mm), both > Russian. The Zenitar is an exceptional performer, costs > about $100 new. Found the Peleng, not exactly on ebay, but at Kiev Camera. Price is about $220 plus shipping, but there doesn't seem to be absolute certainty about a Pentax mount. There's time yet. I need a book contract in before I do any more photo gear buying. > There are still several of the old faithful mirror lenses available, if > you look hard enough, with the K mount for Pentax. My manual tells me [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Anyone tried that or something similar with a K mount lens? Yup. I'm pretty happy with the Sigma f/8 600mm. "Restrictions" include: * fixed aperture ('natch) * No AF * focusses past infinity (nuisance but no big deal) and * some folk really dislike the doughnut "bokeh". Me - I like it! Some astro samples: http://faxmentis.org/html/moonbyjove.html (Moon and Jupiter by night) http://faxmentis.org/html/jpg/moon-by-jove-01.jpg (image only) http://faxmentis.org/html/jovebyday.html (Moon and Jupiter by day) terrestrial: http://www.mendosus.com/jpg/gumnuts.jpg (noisy, cropped) http://www.mendosus.com/jpg/gumnuts2.jpg (hey! those gumnuts are small and a *long* way up!) http://www.mendosus.com/jpg/rosella.jpg (handheld 1/180th, 1600 ISO, v. noisy crop) These are not spectacular, but they are representative (of *my* stuff). I've recently fitted my DS to my Meade 10" SCT (2500 f.l. f/10). Superb results through the viewfinder - nothing to post yet. (Nothing far enough away - and clouds at night!) -- Jeff R. >I've recently fitted my DS to my Meade 10" SCT (2500 f.l. f/10). What accessories do you need to do this? > >I've recently fitted my DS to my Meade 10" SCT (2500 f.l. f/10). > > What accessories do you need to do this? Minimally just a t-adapter (which his Meade probably came with) and a t-ring for his camera. Greg >> >I've recently fitted my DS to my Meade 10" SCT (2500 f.l. f/10). >> >> What accessories do you need to do this? > >Minimally just a t-adapter (which his Meade probably came with) and a t-ring >for his camera. I'm looking to stick my (K-mount) camera on the back of a friend's 14" scope. He doeasn't know much about photography, but tells me it can accept 2" or 1 1/4" eyepieces. I know nothing about scopes, so I don't know what accessories I need to buy ... >>> >I've recently fitted my DS to my Meade 10" SCT (2500 f.l. f/10). >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > it can accept 2" or 1 1/4" eyepieces. I know nothing about scopes, > so I don't know what accessories I need to buy ... You will need a Pentax K, T adapter for the scope. > >>> >I've recently fitted my DS to my Meade 10" SCT (2500 f.l. f/10). > >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You will need a Pentax K, T adapter for the scope. That's roughly what I use. (Sorry about late answer - I just got back from three days out of town.) Either: 1) Meade diagonal attached to visual back, and home-made K to 1.25" mount in the dioagonal, or 2) Meade 2" straight viaual back, with K mount close-up rings, minus the front ring (lens mount), taped onto outside barrel of 2" mount. This method bypasses the diagonal - one reflecting surface I'd rather not include in the light path. Both methods work very well, though a Meade-T and T-K would be much more elegant. I'll post some results later. -- Jeff R. >There are still several of the old faithful mirror lenses available, if >you look hard enough, with the K mount for Pentax. My manual tells me [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >think, can be had with a K mount: I'm more inclined towards the Tamron >500 at the moment). There was also a Tamron SP f/5.6 350mm catadioptric lens, making for a more useful equivalent 525mm f/5.6 on a typical DSLR. They are hard to fine, but are optically as good as the Tamron 500mm f/8. The extra stop is welcome, because catadioptric lenses don't deliver as much light as the claimed aperture would suggest. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.