sandro Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 I'm interested more in the 28mm and zoom. Depends if the 28mm at f2.8 is decently sharp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 13 minutes ago, sandro said: I'm interested more in the 28mm and zoom. Depends if the 28mm at f2.8 is decently sharp. It is pretty sharp and contrasty at 2.8, especially if you have a clean copy. Don't underestimate the 50mm though. It is a HIGHLY regarded lens that gets better reviews than the 1.4. What is your fancy with zoom lenses? Sure they're more convenient, but since you are so worried about speed, I would think primes would be better for you. You will get a way better image with primes, in most cases, and you can always use the old fashioned zoom... Your legs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy lee Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 the Pantax 28mm f2.8 is not that sharp fully wide open - the best cheap 28mm f2.8 is the canon fd version it blows the Pentax away for sharpness at 2.8 fully wide open you can get one on ebay for $50 ish the best 28mm f2.8 you can get this the Nikon AIS 28mm 2.8 and the Contax Carl Zeiss C/Y 28mm 2.8 - both are stunning lenses another great option is the SIGMA 30mm f1.4 it has aspheric elements and is also stellar!! TheRenaissanceMan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 5 minutes ago, andy lee said: the Pantax 28mm f2.8 is not that sharp fully wide open - the best cheap 28mm f2.8 is the canon fd version it blows the Pentax away for sharpness at 2.8 fully wide open you can get one on ebay for $50 ish I think my definition of sharp and other people's are different. I found the Pentax-M 28mm more than sharp enough wide open, but since we're taking wide open, does the metabones XL significantly sharpen lenses wide open or just a little? But, yeah that is why I suggested FD lenses to him the other day. He can get the 50mm 1.8, the 28mm 2.8 and the either the 35-70 or the 35-105 all for less than $200. Or if he wanted to spend twice that, he can pick up the 28mm f2 and the 50mm 1.4 and the 24mm f2 and have a nice little set of FD lenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandro Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 If the FD lenses are much better and even cheaper then I no advantage going Pentax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 I, personally, like the Pentax lenses better. I think they're the most overlooked vintage lenses around. And they are cheaper than FD lenses. Plus, a lot of people use FD lenses, not as many use Pentax, so your videos would have an inherently different look. But FDs are good too and cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Canon fd L lenses are really good especially for the price Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandro Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 How much do you think I should pay for the pentax I mentioned? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homestar_kevin Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 look at keh.com or ebay completed listings for a better idea. Thats not the real question, the real question is how much have they been offered to you for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 17 hours ago, sandro said: How much do you think I should pay for the pentax I mentioned? A pretty good price for exc + condition of the two prime lenses would be around $75. I have no idea about the zoom. On February 3, 2016 at 2:26 AM, TheRenaissanceMan said: Hey guys! Is anyone here knowledgeable about the Olympus OM lens lineup? I'm looking to put together a budget set, but what little information I can find is vague and, in some cases, contradictory. Thanks in advance for any help. I have been wondering the same question. I came across an old OM 50mm f1.8 that I bought a long time ago but never tested. Well today I threw it on the NX500, and it is a really nice lens... Wide open good. So, I went online and encountered the same contradictions you did Then I went on eBay and found a 28mm f2 for a steal... About a third less than the going rate. So, I bought it now. I really like that they made every prime focal length in a f2 version. Have you found out any more about them? I also found 3 different zooms that look pretty interesting... The 35-70mm f3.5, the 35-70mm f4, and the 28-48mm f4. Any info you, or anyone, might have would be greatly appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jase Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 3 hours ago, mercer said: Any info you, or anyone, might have would be greatly appreciated. There exists an awesome wiki about OM lenses, unfortunately it is in German-only. However if you need something translated in particular, let me know. TheRenaissanceMan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 7 hours ago, jase said: There exists an awesome wiki about OM lenses, unfortunately it is in German-only. However if you need something translated in particular, let me know. Thanks Jase, most helpful with a little Google translate. Do you have any OM lenses? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jase Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 4 hours ago, mercer said: Do you have any OM lenses? I own the 85 f2, but it is totally not my focal length, so it is collecting dust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 7 minutes ago, jase said: I own the 85 f2, but it is totally not my focal length, so it is collecting dust. I hear ya, I was thinking about this earlier and wondering what long lenses people use. I have the G7 and the NX500, they both have large crops, so I rarely use anything over 50mm and usually I use a 28mm or 35mm f2. Obviously, there's a need for long lenses, I just haven't come across one yet. That 85mm f2 does look nice though. jase 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jase Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 9 minutes ago, mercer said: I hear ya, I was thinking about this earlier and wondering what long lenses people use. I have the G7 and the NX500, they both have large crops, so I rarely use anything over 50mm and usually I use a 28mm or 35mm f2. Obviously, there's a need for long lenses, I just haven't come across one yet. That 85mm f2 does look nice though. Agreed. I personally dont use anything above 50mm FF-equivalent. something a tad below like a 28mm for APS-C is next to perfect for my style of shooting. mercer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Really low price on the Tokina (Angenieux) 28-70 2.6-2.8 here $275: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1410593 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antonis Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Here is a still from a 4K shot on the NX1 with the Leica 100mm F2.8 macro Elmarit-R: Original 4k: 80% Crop: kidzrevil, Henry Gentles, TheRenaissanceMan and 3 others 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 20, 2016 Share Posted February 20, 2016 A couple weeks ago I ordered the RMC Tokina 35mm f2 in the M42 mount. It was the first time I had ever seen the lens for sale, and there is little written about it online. I did manage to find a couple photos where it was used. They looked so good, I had to have it. It came in the other day, so I took it out this morning for a few minutes... PannySVHS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Carter Posted February 20, 2016 Share Posted February 20, 2016 Canon FL 100mm 3.5 - 1960's era. LONG focus throw. This example looks like it had some fungus cleaned from an internal element, it's a little "scarred" looking when you shine a penlight down the barrel. Little metal tank, 48mm filter thread. $15. Love the colors, detail, and softness-where-you-want it. All from 4K grabs, shot wide open. Minor grade in Photoshop (just upped the blacks a bit) and a touch of sharpening, about what I'd normally do for non-people shots. In particular, there's some really lovely stuff going on with greens and blues. I've played with the FL 35mm 2.5 ($20), 50mm 1.8 ($20) and 19mm 3.5 R ($200, a real legend of a lens, almost zero distortion and hard to find) and they all render similarly. Looking for an 85 next, but that's a highly regarded lens to find this cheap. I could really see doing something narrative-short, fashion-beauty or music video with these. You could build a full set of primes, including the $15 adapters, for a couple hundred bucks (minus the 19mm which usually goes for $350 and up). Lens range also includes a 28mm, 58mm, some of the normal glass in 1.4 and 1/2 variants I believe, a 135mm 2.5(?) and a 200mm f3.5 or f4. TheRenaissanceMan and kidzrevil 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PannySVHS Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 3 hours ago, mercer said: A couple weeks ago I ordered the RMC Tokina 35mm f2 in the M42 mount. It was the first time I had ever seen the lens for sale, and there is little written about it online. I did manage to find a couple photos where it was used. They looked so good, I had to have it. It came in the other day, so I took it out this morning for a few minutes... Hey Mercer, Really like the colors you were able to pick up with the grade, last part seems a little bit dark compared to ungraded material. Grade looks really filmic, rich colors, naturalistic, not LUT mud like:) How did you manage to hold the lens so steady even with focusing? Did you use a speedbooster for a wider angle of view? cheers mercer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.