jsrockit
Moderator
I'm using the P30T today. I really like it.
Ah, my second camera after the K1000... and before quickly switching to a Nikon FM2 because of my perception that Pentax wasn't good enough... I was dumb.
Im looking to replace my pentax mx
- Thread starter gzisis69
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 71
- Views 4K
Ah, my second camera after the K1000... and before quickly switching to a Nikon FM2 because of my perception that Pentax wasn't good enough... I was dumb.
Huss
Veteran
I have found that my Pentax SMC-A 50 f2 renders images very flat:
Huss, it clearly needs more curvature of field, maybe another element or two would help.
Huss
Veteran
Do you think shooting through a coke bottle would help?
Archiver
Veteran
I'm surprised that the 50mm f1.4 isn't up to your standards. I love mine, although we may have different criteria. What exactly are you looking for?
Find images from the Pentax 50mm 1.2 and see if they are more to your liking.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-K-50mm-F1.2-Lens.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-A-50mm-F1.2-Lens.html
Have you looked at the Contax Zeiss lenses with a small Contax SLR? Not sure if Contax made something as small as the MX, though.
Also look at the OM4Ti and appropriate 50mm lenses.
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
The two that you have (the 50/f1.4 and 50/f1.7).
There's many different versions of both (f1.7 - M, A, F, FA; f1.4 - Super Takumar, S-M-C Takumar, SMC Takumar, K, M, A, F, FA), but they all use the same optical design and on an MX they're all going to perform largely the same.
There's the first version of the Super Takumar 50/f1.4 with 8-elements (rather than 7 for all the versions that followed), but if you don't like the 50/f1.4 you have, you're unlikely to like the 8-element.
Likewise, you could pay a bunch of money for the Pentax 50/f1.2 (versions K and A), but performance is going to be the same as the lenses you have at all the apertures they share. Performance at f1.2 certainly isn't going to find you the contrast and sharpness that you're after...
FWIW the Pentax FA Limited 43/f1.9 is as 'normal' as you can get for 35mm film, 43mm being the diagonal of the negative...
Huss
Veteran
50mm f2 SMC-A, Arista 400, P30-T
charjohncarter
Veteran
This guy/gal has either two lenses that are goofed (unlikely) or an MX with a problem. He doesn't seem to get the fact that his problem may be him/her. At least that is the way I see it using basic Aristotelian logic. So, now is the time to suggest either he goes to a support group or reaches out further to RFF. He hasn't provided any of the answers you have ask him to proffer.
As a possibly interesting option, there are several Zeiss-branded lenses made a few years ago for half a dozen SLR mounts including Pentax-K. They're still available new for Nikon only I think. But the ones in Pentax KA mount will be found used fairly readily. Here're samples using the Zeiss ZK Planar T* 50mm f/1.4. I also have the ZK Distagon T* 28mm f/2 and ZK Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 and all of these are great lenses while being somewhat larger and heavier than Pentax offers.
Archiver
Veteran
That's a really good thought. When I started using my Pentax ME more often, it occurred to me that buying the ZK lenses might be a fun move. And adapters will let me use them with any mirrorless camera. Zeiss discontinued the K mount line some years ago, but they are still available new and used on eBay. I would trust the Japanese camera shops if I was going in that direction.
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
The ZK's come up semi regularly on the PentaxForums classifieds. Interesting bunch of lenses.
I'd be curious to see how much you're getting for the money though. A used ZK 50/f1.4 Planar is about 6x the price of a SMC Pentax 50/f1.4, and yet they're both Japanese made classic Double-Gauss 50's with 7 elements in 6 groups. As far as I can tell, neither have any fancy elements or other optical trickery...
I'd be curious to see how much you're getting for the money though. A used ZK 50/f1.4 Planar is about 6x the price of a SMC Pentax 50/f1.4, and yet they're both Japanese made classic Double-Gauss 50's with 7 elements in 6 groups. As far as I can tell, neither have any fancy elements or other optical trickery...
Archiver
Veteran
Ummm, Zeiss T* coating and build tolerances, and getting a recently made modern lens as opposed to a potentially dusty, flarey lens from the 70s. Not that there's anything wrong with 70s Pentax lenses, I love them. But I figure that a Zeiss lens made in the last 15 years will be better than a consumer Pentax made 40 something years ago, if for nothing but better coatings and potentially less chances of dust, fungus, yellowing etc. I'd actually like to find out that a good copy of the Pentax M SMC 50 is as good as a Zeiss Planar from the last decade, it would save me some future money.
CMur12
Veteran
To the OP:
I can understand it if you don't like the rendition of the lenses in question, as this is purely subjective and distinct from performance numbers. (As an example of the same, some of us love Minolta glass, while others just don't see it.)
If this is the case, none of us are going to be able to tell you what you'll like. You will only be able to find a lens that meets your expectations by trying a lot of them out.
I don't have any personal experience with Zeiss or Leica lenses for 35mm cameras, but I've read that each of these brands has its own look distinct from that of the other. So, you could conceivably like Leica/Leitz, but not Zeiss, or Zeiss, but not Leica/Leitz. Both brands are German, but they speak different dialects! 😉
- Murray
I can understand it if you don't like the rendition of the lenses in question, as this is purely subjective and distinct from performance numbers. (As an example of the same, some of us love Minolta glass, while others just don't see it.)
If this is the case, none of us are going to be able to tell you what you'll like. You will only be able to find a lens that meets your expectations by trying a lot of them out.
I don't have any personal experience with Zeiss or Leica lenses for 35mm cameras, but I've read that each of these brands has its own look distinct from that of the other. So, you could conceivably like Leica/Leitz, but not Zeiss, or Zeiss, but not Leica/Leitz. Both brands are German, but they speak different dialects! 😉
- Murray
BernardL
Well-known
Have you tried taking pictures with your poor lenses, using a tripod? Read this:
https://measuringlight.com/2019/04/15/your-sharpest-lens-is-a-tripod/
Have you looked at prints of the same scene, same film, same f-number, with only different lens (and body as needed). In a blind test, can you decide one is better? and can you consistently pick the Leitz (or Zeiss, whatever) against Pentax (or Canon, Nikon, Olympus, whatever).
Can you show us examples (again, same scene, etc) of the "character" of those upper-tier brands versus Pentax? Maybe I'm a moron, but the only "characters" I can discern are (a) totally crappy lenses (Holga...) and soap-bubble bokeh (Triotar...).
Could it be that you base your opinion on the optical quality of Pentax lenses on a comparison between your pics (that happen to be taken with a Pentax lens) against the pics of photographer "X" (that happen to e taken with a "Y" lens)??
leicapixie
Well-known
I've used Pentax Asahi Takumar lenses and bodies since 1960's..
Used professionally for magazines and newspapers..
"Not good enough"? Really? In what way?
Coatings against flare superior to Leica anytime..
I at one stage moved to Nikon (kept the Pentax rigs).
reason "headaches" when shooting long periods with Pentax..
I really needed glasses, being short sighted.,
Following 'Digital Tsunami', donated, bought,
acquired many makes and models. for peanuts.
Minolta lenses so similar to Leica "look" it's scary..
Canon A-series are a joy to use and play with.
It's now 2020, many of my bought new cameras are over 50 years old!
They are all, repeat all very good.
No camera and no lens is totally superior.
Photography well done, is more than push button on "fancy" priced equipment..
Technique, study and reading, comparing and actual testing might give more insight.
Used professionally for magazines and newspapers..
"Not good enough"? Really? In what way?
Coatings against flare superior to Leica anytime..
I at one stage moved to Nikon (kept the Pentax rigs).
reason "headaches" when shooting long periods with Pentax..
I really needed glasses, being short sighted.,
Following 'Digital Tsunami', donated, bought,
acquired many makes and models. for peanuts.
Minolta lenses so similar to Leica "look" it's scary..
Canon A-series are a joy to use and play with.
It's now 2020, many of my bought new cameras are over 50 years old!
They are all, repeat all very good.
No camera and no lens is totally superior.
Photography well done, is more than push button on "fancy" priced equipment..
Technique, study and reading, comparing and actual testing might give more insight.
gzisis69
Established
I uploaded some samples on a flickr account i made today cause i couldnt upload photos here. My flickr name is Georgios Zisis
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
I had a look and to be honest I don’t think you’re going to get much valuable feedback by sharing screenshots off your phone... They look like snapshots, that I suspect would look the same taken with anything from a 50mm Summilux to a worn out Auto-Takumar...
Archiver
Veteran
Agreed. The phone screenshots are too small to be of any evaluative viewing use. Some of the larger images are useful, though. I'm not sure what 'more' you want from your 50mm images.
This one, for example, you could have taken with a range of decent 50s and there wouldn't be much difference. Great picture, though.
old pics of me by Georgios Zisis, on Flickr
This one could have been taken with a phone, there aren't many distinguishing characteristics in bokeh, rendering, etc
old pics of me by Georgios Zisis, on Flickr
CharlesDAMorgan
Veteran
Not to echo others about the screen shot quality but from what I've seen you are a good photographer and I would struggle to differentiate the quality of the results from those lenses vs those I have from Leica and Zeiss. If you want to buy those, that's your choice and I respect it, I love the Leica and Zeiss glass I've got, but you don't need to. For their innate quality Pentax / Takumar cameras and lenses are stunning value.
Ste_S
Well-known
So I presume the ones Georgios are talking about are the ones at the bottom of his flickr feed that look mobile phone screen grabs such as
With the best will in the world Georgios you're not making it easy for us to help you! Do you have full size images we could see? Also if you could help us with your process (how developed and scanned) we can advise more.
With the best will in the world Georgios you're not making it easy for us to help you! Do you have full size images we could see? Also if you could help us with your process (how developed and scanned) we can advise more.
Similar threads
- Article
