M100 f/4 Macro

<p>I saw one go up for sale cheap (under $100) and had to snap it up. It's got minor haze, which I couldn't even see at first. But if I hold the lens in daylight I can see a little behind the front element. I took it with me today on a nice long mountain bike ride and good a few shots that confirm my suspicion that the haze doesn't seem to have much effect. I'm thinking it might make more flare if shooting into light, but I saw no artifacts during some standard shooting today. Yay!<br>

.<br>

<a title="IMGP9887.jpg by MattB.net, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5305/5724357140_47c596e4a9_z.jpg" alt="IMGP9887.jpg" width="425" height="640" /></a><br>

.<br>

<a title="IMGP9908.jpg by MattB.net, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/5723801781_4a484a997a_z.jpg" alt="IMGP9908.jpg" width="640" height="425" /></a><br>

.<br>

<a title="IMGP9912.jpg by MattB.net, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5084/5723803089_13035f4ca7_z.jpg" alt="IMGP9912.jpg" width="640" height="425" /></a><br>

.<br>

<a title="IMGP9915.jpg by MattB.net, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5298/5723804487_ec70c6f976_z.jpg" alt="IMGP9915.jpg" width="425" height="640" /></a><br>

.<br>

<a title="IMGP9922.jpg by MattB.net, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5022/5723806459_143ab48fa7_z.jpg" alt="IMGP9922.jpg" width="640" height="425" /></a><br>

.<br>

<a title="IMGP9968.jpg by MattB.net, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5055/5724365344_7d3edf897c_z.jpg" alt="IMGP9968.jpg" width="640" height="425" /></a><br>

.<br>

It seems to do ok with landscapes too!<br>

<a title="IMGP9956.jpg by MattB.net, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2618/5724363672_6af0ece061_z.jpg" alt="IMGP9956.jpg" width="640" height="425" /></a></p>

<p> </p>

<p>I had the same lens, only the 'A' version. It too came with 'minor haze' The problem was quite profound in certain lighting situations but was otherwise fine. I finally replaced it with the same lens (no flare). Wonderful lens.</p>

<p>Good pic's,Matt!</p>

<p>Very nice examples from an excellent and possibly under-rated lens! Mine cost $103.88. One attraction is its optical design, a true Heliar of the later type, a symmetrical design which gives better correction for close up and macro shots. The M version like mine and yours has the same optics as the following A version and the 100mm Bellows lens.<br>

Pentax brochure comment: Suitable for close-up and macrophotography, as well as normal shooting. Especially useful for shooting nature pictures, for reproduction work and for portraiture. Because of its longer focal length, this lens provides greater magnification than the Macro 50mm f/4.</p>

<p>I like the 6th one best Matt; I find digital capture of white and yellow flowers to be fairly challenging and you have done a nicely even job here.</p>

<p>I have the M42 SMC Takumar version of this lens that I enjoy using on my Canon 7D. Fantastic color and the feel of the lens while focusing is superb. As Doug notes, the optics are so fine. I've used it on a 5D MK2 with pleasing results. The only bugaboo is that it is 1:2 which throws me off now and then.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-DTJZFGs/0/M/i-DTJZFGs-M.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>ME</p>

 

<p>The haze is likely lens separation, which is common in this lens. The haze seems to have little effect, unless the light source is in the frame. Pentax did make a 100mm extension tube that allowed greater than 1:1 with this lens. Terrific lens with a great build, typical of the M lenses.</p>

 

<p>Thanks - I'm pretty pleased it.<br>

I'm going to try it on my vivitar 2x macro TC one of these days and see how a that works for the super close stuff.</p>