Nice! Victor Steinbrueck Park! Unusual weather (it rained the entire time I was in Seattle 30 odd years ago).
That was Hard B&W mode, with a couple of minor tweaks. I like how it rendered the grass!Nice! Victor Steinbrueck Park! Unusual weather (it rained the entire time I was in Seattle 30 odd years ago).
This is lovely, and I really like the way that Pentax camera renders things.
There is a strange slight colour cast in these ones.I reminded myself that not every Pentax K-3 III Monochrome photo has to have a ton of tonal gradation. Made some mobile edits in Snapseed.
View attachment 4876771
View attachment 4876772
View attachment 4876773
View attachment 4876774
First one is gorgeous.![]()
![]()
Both with the 16-50
It's just part of the mobile edit. I didn't go "straight" with it.There is a strange slight colour cast in these ones.
I understand this - it is a bit tighter than a 50.In post #309 one thing I emphasized was that I had not found an autofocus normal that I like. The 35/2.8 macro is the best overall ‘normal’ that I have used for the Pentax K-3 iii Monochrome, but it’s too slow. Looking at some photos today, both the Pentax 35 and the Sigma 35/1.4 are substantially longer or have a substantially narrower field than the Leica 50/1.4 ASPH, and I would prefer a proper ‘normal’. 35s are too long for me (yes, I am picky). I am going to try the Pentax 31/1.8 but I wish Pentax would make a nice highly corrected 31/1.4 or 33/1.4 specifically for this format.
I have the 15, 21 and 70mm Limiteds. They are all lovely lenses in their own way. I really like the tonality they deliver and I’m happy to shoot with any of them. The main downside with the lenses is the camera - I find it harder to focus any of them, but especially the 35 and 70, than it is to focus an equivalent or nearly equivalent lens on a mirrorless camera or a digital Leica M with live view. The Pentax lenses don’t lose tonality with slight focus errors like the Leica ones do - this is a downside of lens design where focus falls off quickly away from the plane of focus - but I throw away a lot more frames with the Pentax because of focus errors than I would with the Leica. My eyesight is also decreasing both in that I need a lot more correction than I used to and when fully corrected I have less acuity than I used to have. Time. Sorry, again this is more about the system than the lenses, but what I think of them is interlinked.I understand this - it is a bit tighter than a 50.
I think you have the 21 and 70 DA limiteds? How do you find them?
Thanks Marty. Appreciate that a system is just that. I’m 59 now and had a detached retina a few years ago in my right, camera, eye. I was fortunate and the repair was successful and left me with no related vision problems. However, I then had a consequent cataract that required lens replacement. That’s settle down to leaving me with good acuity and a -0.5 prescription. That turns out to work well with my Leica with no contact lens - better than before when I was correcting with -8.5 contact lenses! I’m sure there will be another period of aging to come though.I have the 15, 21 and 70mm Limiteds. They are all lovely lenses in their own way. I really like the tonality they deliver and I’m happy to shoot with any of them. The main downside with the lenses is the camera - I find it harder to focus any of them, but especially the 35 and 70, than it is to focus an equivalent or nearly equivalent lens on a mirrorless camera or a digital Leica M with live view. The Pentax lenses don’t lose tonality with slight focus errors like the Leica ones do - this is a downside of lens design where focus falls off quickly away from the plane of focus - but I throw away a lot more frames with the Pentax because of focus errors than I would with the Leica. My eyesight is also decreasing both in that I need a lot more correction than I used to and when fully corrected I have less acuity than I used to have. Time. Sorry, again this is more about the system than the lenses, but what I think of them is interlinked.