Reality Check: How usable are legacy lenses on modern Pentax dSLRs?

[User_502260]

<p>I have the Vivitar version of the Kiron lens. It's marked 100mm f/2.8. I have two of them in Canon FD mount. It's heavy but goes to 1:1 (full frame) without an extra tube. The Tamron works well but the Adaptall II mount for Pentax KA cost much more than other Adaptall II mounts I have bought. I also have the very light 100/3.5 Vivitar macro in KA mount, along with the 1:1 close-up lens/adapter which fits on the front. If a used K-x in good condition and at a good price shows up I may get it as a back-up. The white version looks pretty. </p>

[laur1]

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>Need of green button in metering for the K and M lenses</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>I completely forgot about this chore, although I mentioned the mount crippling in my post. I just forgot what the exact experience was with these lenses now that I have no longer used one on a Pentax DSLR in more than a year. This problem pretty much undermines the fact that you don't need an adapter on Pentax cameras - I'd rather use an adapter and get automatic metering than be able to mount the lens directly but then have to fidget with the green button.</p>

[hinman]

<p>@Jeff, we have so much in common. I have a Cosina 1:1 macro adapter that is likely similar to macro adapter that comes as a matching pair with your very light 100mm f/3.5 macro in KA mount in 1:2 close up.</p>

<p>One of the macro lens that I love with great manual focusing ring and with A setting is the Pentax A 50mm f/2.8 1:2 macro. The Pentax K 100mm f/4.0 1:2 macro is even better than the 50 as the longer throw and the unique K mount build quality is better than the A version, but the green button takes away some of the joy in using the K-mount lenses.</p>

<p><a title="a50macro_cosina by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5474/10581323594_293da5c623_b.jpg" alt="a50macro_cosina" width="685" height="1024" /></a><br /> Pentax A 50mm f/2.8 1:2 macro + Cosina 1:1 macro adapter</p>

<p><a title="a50macro_cosina2 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3770/10581315474_f189836f6f_b.jpg" alt="a50macro_cosina2" width="1001" height="1024" /></a><br /> Pentax A 50mm f/2.8 1:2 macro + Cosina 1:1 macro adapter<br /><br /><br /><br /> I am a fan of adaptall-2 lenses and one of my favorite is the tamron 90mm f/2.5. However, I much prefer the color and sharpness on the Vivitar/Kiron better, the tamron tend to have more CA unless stopped down. At one time, I have 4 copies of the tamron adaptall-2 p/k-a adapters and I can easily go out with 2 adaptall-2 lens without the need of mounting/dismounting.</p>

<p>My Tamron adaptall-2 17mm f/3.5 is on sale as well in PF marketplace now onto 3rd page, here is a picture with it mounted on my K-7<br /> <a title="DSC01915 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7148/6821317739_0248b8a0f3_b.jpg" alt="DSC01915" width="1024" height="791" /></a></p>

<p><a title="DSC01913 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7022/6821314253_296763a3d1_b.jpg" alt="DSC01913" width="1024" height="680" /></a></p>

[hinman]

<p>@Laurentiu, how can you forget this chore. No punt intended. We both know how good the alternatives are. If I start over again, I will have a EM-1 and A7. The green button usually comes as second nature after some use after a week but when I branch out to MILC, this has become an issue with me as I much prefer the experience with A mount. However strange it may sound, the original K-mount type of lenses that are not marked without the M on the labeling are always better and unique. The focus throw is top notch if you ask me. And the very best in the focus throw that I have used are the Pentax K 100mm f/4.0 and the Pentax 645 A 120mm f/4.0 1:1 macro, actually all the Pentax 645 manual focus lenses are excellent as there isn't a green button on the big brother.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <a title="_IGP7706 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2527/3885181637_4812209b07_b.jpg" alt="_IGP7706" width="1024" height="680" /></a><br /> <br /><br /><br /> @Jeff, as much as I love the K-x white, I think you are better off with a used K-5. With the coming of K-3, the Pentax loyal user base are dumbing the K-5 for < $500 a piece. If you have tried any of the K-5, K5 II and K5 IIs variants, you will fall in love with the shutter. It is gorgeously quiet and it is one of the BEST thing from Pentax. And if K50 is quiet as well, I will suggest in looking for a white K50.</p>

[snik75]

<p>For the OP, you could avoid the extra bells and whistles and get a used Pentax *ist DS. They have one in excellent condition at KEH for about $100. Throw in an S type focus screen and you are pretty much set using your old manual lenses. You can even use the pop up flash for fill flash if you so desire, something the later models can't do with non-A lenses. Menu diving is pretty much limited to changing the ISO or the flash exposure compensation. It'd be a reasonable way to see if Pentax DSLRs work for you.</p>

[doug elick]

<p>I very much appreciate all the input I've received thus far. The thought of a used body is intriguing, but I'm not just looking at this as only a way to emulate manual work in the digital world. Yes, the ability to manually control the camera (w/o digging into menus) is paramount, but advances such as high effective ISO, in body IS, high pixel count, greater bit depth (14 vs 12), etc. that a newer model brings are important aspects as well. I truly am looking at this as an investment in a system. I want to be able to use older lenses, but not necessarily be *forced* into it.</p>

<p>I looked at the A7's specs and it is truly impressive. I like the rangefinder look 'n feel and the FF sensor, but there are some deficiencies to me. Namely, there are currently only 4 lenses available, the the max effective ISO is much lower and it's more expensive than the K3 with the 35-135 kit lens to boot. I'm not sure how I feel about the electronic viewfinder too, but at least it has more than a display. As someone with limited funds (many Pentax limited lenses cost a significant chunk [or more] than the yearly budget I've allotted for photograpy), I'm looking for the "jack of all trades" and view the purchase as a long term investment. The K1000 has been my primary 35mm camera for almost 30 years! I know the lifecycle of a digital camera is less than the mechanical wonders of yore of course, but you can see where I'm coming from. If money was no object, I'd *leap* at a 645D, but high value is quite important. Why do you think I'm still a fan of Pentax? When I can afford a digital camera that can match the beautiful creamy tone the RB67 loaded with a nice slow B&W film carefully developed in Rodinol and printed with love can produce, then I'll finally let go of film.</p>

<p>I know the lifecycle of a digital camera is less than the mechanical wonders of yore, of course, but you can see where I'm coming from. Heck, given the resonable success I've had with the modest, "give away" Rebel Digital, the prospect of tossing a K5 II or K3 (if its high ISO specs live up to the hype) onto my f5 10 inch telescope is almost mouth watering. I've read snippets that it might be possible to use the camera's sensor shift to compensate for short term drift - is this true ?!?</p>

<p>Given my shooting style, the prospect of a a fast lens on a body with built in IS and extremely high ISO also means I could chuck my flash unit for all intents and purposes - it would fry a dSLR anyway (modified V283).</p>

<p>Please keep your thoughts and experiences coming. I have much to think about. It seems I make a major photographic gear purchase every 10 years or so and need to make sure that what I finally invest in not only performs well but is enjoyable to use. I'll admit it and say I indeed suffer from gear lust and a new piece of kit can inspire me to get out and brave the elements/crowds/etc. Some of my favorite medium format photos were taken with my first MF camera, a modest Rolleicord IV. Exploring uncharted territory was invigorating.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br /> Doug</p>

<p> </p>

[snik75]

<p>Whatever you pick, Doug, I can almost assure you that after a brief learning curve you will find your photography invigorated. One can do so much with digital files these days. Even the process of shooting without thinking of volume cost is freeing. Can I make 20-30 attempts at light trails - sure. And if none of them work, delete and move on. Or maybe I can blend four together and make something amazing.</p>

<p>I held on to my film cameras for a lot longer than anyone else I know. But at a certain point I just had to admit that shooting digitally made more sense for me.</p>

[hinman]

<p>@Douglas, you will be very welcome to join us in the Pentax family that extends to digital. If you are into starscape shooting, MattB in our forum has this wonderful article <br /><br /><br /> <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/shooting-a-starscape/intro.html">http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/shooting-a-starscape/intro.html</a></p>

<p>and I forget the link of a site with some great pentax fan who shoot various night scenes using Pentax with huge telescopes. I will update you when I find the link. In the mean time, you can visit this timelapse video to see my inspiration. Some great Pentax member did this with K-5</p>

<h1 id="watch-headline-title"><br />Pentax K5 -- Milky Way Timelapse 2013 by pentaxguyz</h1>

<h1><a href="http://youtu.be/6UqHaYu_m7A">http://youtu.be/6UqHaYu_m7A</a> (can't embed here)</h1>

<h1> </h1>

<p>And I am total amateur with meteor shooting. I attempted empty meteor shots with plane crossing patterns using image stacking way back in 2009 with K20D and DA 10-17mm fish-eye -- the equivalent of FA 17-28 fisheye<br /> <a title="_IGP6487 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2495/3815317259_3ee91d4ca4_b.jpg" alt="_IGP6487" width="1024" height="680" /></a></p>

<p><a title="_IGP6631 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3469/3818943523_b90db21f55_b.jpg" alt="_IGP6631" width="1024" height="680" /></a></p>

<p><a title="merged1 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2606/3816238671_ee235b8531_b.jpg" alt="merged1" width="1024" height="680" /></a><br /> <br />My failed attempt is documented in <a href="http://www.techtheman.com/2009/08/meteor-night-with-pentax-da-10-17mm-f35.html">this blog post</a></p>

[hinman]

<p>Can't embed the video inline, one needs to visit the youtube link that I provide above. Sorry!</p>

[hinman]

<p>This guy's work is fantastic and out of the norm and I can't be more proud seeing the work made with Pentax gear. If anyone that has interest in night sky photography and shooting MilkyWay, you can draw the inspiration from these two places that I dig out from my bookmarks. The first link is my favorite as the AstronoMike has been using Pentax gear along with his Telescopic tool to open our visions to the distant galaxies -- amazing work</p>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.astronomike.net/deep-sky/galaxies/index.html">http://en.astronomike.net/deep-sky/galaxies/index.html</a> (Hin's favorite)<br /><br /></li>

<li><a href="http://www.thenocturnes.com/resources.html">http://www.thenocturnes.com/resources.html</a></li>

</ul>

 

[doug elick]

<p>I think it's inevitable that I'm going to wind up purchasing either a K5II or K3 with the 18-135. The question becomes, "Does the K3 represent $600 worth of performance and future proofing over the K5II?". I wish the DxO and Dpreview reviews were available now!</p>

<p>Doug</p>

[hinman]

<p>I will be honest to say that getting the K5II is crazy nuts given what is promised in K3 but again, this is all subjective and there is no right or wrong purchase decision. We can only know so much in advance. What seems right can happen to be totally wrong in another's person perspective and experience. But if I put myself in your shoes to look for a new K5II, I would rather look for a good used K-5 as people are dumbing K-5 left and right for about $500 a piece with shutter count less than 10K or about 1 year old. </p>

<p>But getting K-3 at this time can be crazy nuts too. Unlike the introduction of K5II after K5, the changes are minor and K5II come out with much less user griefs as what happened to users with K5 introduction plagued with serious sensor stain issue. Many members should still remember the sensor stain which plagued the initial introduction of K-5 with sensor stain issues recorded on every single picture captured with the sensor. The same caution should be taken on K-3 as many of the new features and new innovations are first time especially on the new sensor, new image processor, and the new AF system among others. I will suggest paying close attention to user reviews and problems in <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/">http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/</a> and have a feel and draw inputs from Pentax users. I will be closely watching on the side-line as I for one won't jump on K-3 until the first update on FIRMWARE and that Lightroom or ACR has the native support of K-3 raw files.<br /><br /><br />Just my personal perspective</p>

[michael_elenko]

<blockquote>

<p> The question becomes, "Does the K3 represent $600 worth of performance and future proofing over the K5II?".</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Considering how infrequently you cycle through digital cameras. . .I don't think you'll notice that $600 over the lifetime of your using the K-3. Of course it is smarter to wait for user feedback on new models (of course I am ignoring my own advice here).</p>

<p>ME</p>

[hinman]

<p>Sorry to be blunt -- the 'crazy nuts' that I refer to are the brave souls among the Pentax community who dare to take the plunge as early adopters. I salute to all the brave ones especially MattB and ME. Can't wait to hear from them on their unboxing event.</p>

[doug elick]

<p>Oh, I've been reading the Pentax forums with great interest. From what I can tell, the consensus is that roughly speaking, the K3 image quality is better than the D7100 and though no slouch, behind the D600. And that the K3 is a quantum leap in speed/responsiveness over its predecessor. And finally that it could be a bit noisier than the K5II, but it's not exactly apples to apples since it's a 24 MP sensor. The example photos posted and the 100% crops show how the resolution is bordering on outright silly/crazy. They have to be bumping up against the lens itself in that regard.<br>

The whole noise question concerns me the most, since I enjoy available light and will be using this for astrophotography (on a scope) from time to time. Certainly the higher MP sensor would give me more room to crop.... I've also seen charts from the K5 that show it has more red sensitivity compared to Canikon cameras, which would explain why folks are getting impressive results when capturing H-alpha nebulae with unmodified cameras.</p>

[doug elick]

<p>Well, we'll see how well those old lenses work on a new K3 (in conjunction with the 18-135)....</p>

<p>Doug</p>

[michael_elenko]

Douglas,

 

Congrats. We will share notes.

ME

[hinman]

<p>Congratulation Douglas. Can't be happier for you. And you have made the major stride crossing the bridge and we can share the joy in both film and digital</p>

<p><a title="Golden Gate Bridge Model by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5497/10544781016_7c10314b2c_b.jpg" alt="Golden Gate Bridge Model" width="1024" height="681" /></a></p>

<p>To each their own, I still bear my dream of developing my own photos in a darkroom setup in a storage room above my detached garage. I splurge into film occasionally and I always admire at my friends who take great photos on b&w with films. Welcome to the Pentax digital family. </p>

[MattB.Net]

<p>We can go through this together. Hopefully we will look back on it fondly. :)<br /> I look forward to trying mine out for the Ison appearance!<br /> Oh, and the 18-135 is a fine lens for what it is. I like having the weather sealed option in a lot of situations and IQ is not bad at all.</p>

[doug elick]

<p>I'm still not giving up on my Rolleicord IV, C330 kit and RB67 kit. But those are machines that lend themselves to specific cases. 35mm (and now digital) is the "jack of all trades".</p>

<p>I have a ton to learn. Does the K3 have a built in intervalometer? Is the ground glass changeable? Is it possible to power it externally (think time lapse)? Can the HDR function be used in conjunction with time lapse? *Is my old Macbook up to the task of 24 MP RAWs*? This will give me a reason to once more establish a relationship with a good photo processor in town (there are only two left!) since I'm just not going to dork with high end ink-jet. I've still yet to run the Ektar 100 I have in my freezer through the RB67 or C330.</p>

[hinman]

<p>Douglas, I have strong interest in your C330. But I am glad that my past bid for C330 was lost to others. I have way too many gear and close to 1/3 to 1/4 of my gear are still film related and I am a total stranger to films as I am someone trying to go back from digital to analog to find my lost film roots in childhood. <br /><br /><br /> I don't have the Rolleicord but the<a href="http://www.techtheman.com/2011/10/rolleiflex-automat-mx-evs.html"> Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS</a>. It was unfortunate it had alignment issues between the two lens that I have to sell it at a loss. It was one of a kind shutter experience -- very quiet and yet intimately known to its use for its photographer. The build and turning crank is unique and last through ages</p>

<p><a title="_IGP9918 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4109/5058345862_6892e117df_b.jpg" alt="_IGP9918" width="680" height="1024" /></a><br /> My wet printing from a film development class on the back of Rolleiflex</p>

<p><a title="_IGP8852 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5010/5247412479_215396ff03_b.jpg" alt="_IGP8852" width="680" height="1024" /></a><br /> I use a CD box simulating the film plane in testing the alignment between the receiving and taking glass -- very fun project.</p>

<p>And now I settled with a less intriguing but still <a href="http://www.techtheman.com/2011/11/yashica-mat-124g-lovely-tlr.html">lovely TLR with Yashica MAT 124G</a></p>

<p><a title="_IGP8817 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4078/4951684987_eb90bd04dc_b.jpg" alt="_IGP8817" width="1024" height="680" /></a></p>

<p><a title="_IGP8816 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4128/4951684635_a2ba923e0e_b.jpg" alt="_IGP8816" width="680" height="1024" /></a><br /> The metering surprisingly works but after a year or two, it no longer budge.</p>

<p> </p>

[hinman]

<p>An Ektar 100 picture that reminds me of the anti-newton ring glass that I need for scanning negatives with my limited home scanning with a Canon F8800 flatbed</p>

<p><a title="IMG_0051 by hin_man, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6045/6350426191_388e5ba077_b.jpg" alt="IMG_0051" width="762" height="1024" /></a><br /> Ektar 100, Pentax 645N and FA 45mm f/2.8, home scanned, developed likely by Dwayne's Photo in Kansas</p>

<p>The digital may have surpassed the color film for flexibility and versatility in post processing but I always find the pellet from some of the color films like Ektar and Portra along with unique Slides just as appealing and unique in their own rights. Of course, I love more on the true B&W films along with my favorite C41 jounralistic film with Kodak BW400CN</p>

[doug elick]

<p>I'm hanging on to the MF gear primarily for B&W work. <br>

That's a shame about your Rollei. People shouldn't dork with lenses unless they know exactly what they're doing. My 'cord has a f3.5 Schneider Xenar - if one works within its limitations, it's a great lens. Be aware of flare and don't expect miracles wide open and it won't disappoint. Honestly, choice lenses on the C330 system are no slouches either - again, understanding the limits of their coating tech, etc. they're damned sharp - the black 180mm tele for example is such a specimen. I really enjoy the C330 the most when compared to the Rollei and RB67 in terms of usability and workman like reliability. The Rollei excels at light, unobtrusive street photography and the build quality is awe inspiring, but you have one focal length. The Rb67 gives you that beautiful big negative, but it's big, heavy and HEAVY (did I mention it's heavy?). Plus, it's kind of quirky. And I have a "thing" for TLRs.</p>

<p>Basically, a clean C330F is a solid workhorse that will win no awards for style, but should someone attempt to mug you, you could beat them senseless with it and then proceed to photograph the gruesome results afterwards. BTW, once you experience the joy of flash sync at 1/500 with a dead silent leaf shutter, 1/buzzillion speed focal plane shutters seem annoying.</p>

<p>Doug</p>

[michael_elenko]

<blockquote>

<p>Is my old Macbook up to the task of 24 MP RAWs*?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It should but it depends on how old you are talking about in digital dog years. If you are talking about the original white Macbook (my son has one handed down two generations in our home) then it is questionable. I guess we forgot to mention the real downstream costs of buying a new DSLR :0</p>

<p>If you have a newer Pro model and able to run 10.7 (Lion) then you should be just fine. The biggest impact to your operations will be storage. If you don't have an external FW drive consider getting a 3TB one. They are affordable these days. How much RAM is in your laptop? </p>

<p>Shooting DNG instead of PEF will enable you to get very good results when you get your camera. You'll have to wait a short while until Adobe and Apple upgrade their profiles to include the K-3, depending on the particular post processing software you favor. This will fine-tune the processing.</p>

<p>ME</p>

[doug elick]

<p>My Macbook is a unibody Macbook (not pro). Dual core 2.4 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 10.7.5; it's no spring chicken. A new machine is in my future anyway - dealing with GoPro video in "Protune" mode spitting out 1080P/60 (or higher!) - up to 45 Mb/Sec bitrate - presents a challenge for this machine and a bigger one to my patience. </p>