Manual Focus Forum http://forum.manualfocus.org Manual Focus Forum en http://backend.userland.com/rss Tamron 90/2.5 52B center flare in Manual Focus: English : Manual Lens: Usage http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130657#130657 130657@http://forum.manualfocus.org I have a Canon Xt, 30D,  and now two 40Ds.   This lens does that on all my Canon cameras.   I have NOT  rung it out thuroughly   on my Pentax K10D   but it either  does not exhibit this on the Pentax,  or it's much reduced.On mine  it does not take much light,  and anything tighter than about F8  shows the flare distinctly I have a Canon Xt, 30D,  and now two 40Ds.   This lens does that on all my Canon cameras.   I have NOT  rung it out thuroughly   on my Pentax K10D   but it either  does not exhibit this on the Pentax,  or it's much reduced.

On mine  it does not take much light,  and anything tighter than about F8  shows the flare distinctly

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:13:09 +0000 Tamron 90/2.5 52B center flare in Manual Focus: English : Manual Lens: Usage http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130656#130656 130656@http://forum.manualfocus.org I've got a Tamron 90/2.5 (52B) macro lens that's wonderfully sharp and which I use quite a bit on my Canon 400D (digital crop sensor).  The problem is that, unless you've got a properly sized hood (mine is too wide), it takes hardly any light at all to create a circular blue spot in the middle of the frame.  I assume this is flare.  This is the only lens I have that does this (out of 20+, some much older than this), so I'm wondering if there's anything I can do about it, or if I've got a bad copy or something.  A couple example shots follow (chosen for their demonstration of the effect, not their image quality).In the first example, the light was ambient from a bright, overcast sky with no hood.  In the second example, the flare was caused by an overly bright background (white paper being hit by a flash) with a hood in place.I'm keeping an eye out for a 135mm hood with a 49mm (or slightly larger) screw thread that I can use.  I have a collapsible, rubber hood that's designed for 80mm lenses on a 58mm thread, but I still have to be pretty careful about lighting, and I'd like something tighter that's not a pain to store. I've got a Tamron 90/2.5 (52B) macro lens that's wonderfully sharp and which I use quite a bit on my Canon 400D (digital crop sensor).  The problem is that, unless you've got a properly sized hood (mine is too wide), it takes hardly any light at all to create a circular blue spot in the middle of the frame.  I assume this is flare.  This is the only lens I have that does this (out of 20+, some much older than this), so I'm wondering if there's anything I can do about it, or if I've got a bad copy or something.  A couple example shots follow (chosen for their demonstration of the effect, not their image quality).

http://photos.jedi.com/2010/20100115/IMG_2072_640.jpg

http://photos.jedi.com/2010/20100313/IMG_3378_640.jpg

In the first example, the light was ambient from a bright, overcast sky with no hood.  In the second example, the flare was caused by an overly bright background (white paper being hit by a flash) with a hood in place.

I'm keeping an eye out for a 135mm hood with a 49mm (or slightly larger) screw thread that I can use.  I have a collapsible, rubber hood that's designed for 80mm lenses on a 58mm thread, but I still have to be pretty careful about lighting, and I'd like something tighter that's not a pain to store.

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:30:57 +0000 Canon 5D mk 11 only £150!!! in Manual Focus: English : Off-Topic http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130655#130655 130655@http://forum.manualfocus.org Parasites is spot on, unfortunately they're legal parasites, little more than glorified con men.   This type of "service" appeared in the UK in the last year or so recycling unwanted 'phones and gold jewellery and has been the subject of some reports that talk of well below market value payments and also more worryingly as a sort of legal fence for stolen items. It would be interesting to know if simplydrop check the serial numbers of cameras against police records of stolen items.Pete Parasites is spot on, unfortunately they're legal parasites, little more than glorified con men.
   This type of "service" appeared in the UK in the last year or so recycling unwanted 'phones and gold jewellery and has been the subject of some reports that talk of well below market value payments and also more worryingly as a sort of legal fence for stolen items. It would be interesting to know if simplydrop check the serial numbers of cameras against police records of stolen items.


Pete

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:27:10 +0000 DIY SLR camera in Manual Focus: English : Off-Topic http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130654#130654 130654@http://forum.manualfocus.org It seems rather unfair to criticise someone's skilled efforts at building a camera and using a color they preferred for the covering. I personally applaud the  builder and the result. Why they did it was because they could! Are the rest of us able? Maybe, or not!meniscus It seems rather unfair to criticise someone's skilled efforts at building a camera and using a color they preferred for the covering. I personally applaud the  builder and the result. Why they did it was because they could! Are the rest of us able? Maybe, or not!

meniscus

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:28:35 +0000 Tamron SP 500mm Cement separation? in Manual Focus: English : Maintenance & Repairs http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130653#130653 130653@http://forum.manualfocus.org I used cellulose thinners, it's a bit more potent the acetone. Methalene chloride (paint stripper) would be best. If you can get some. I used cellulose thinners, it's a bit more potent the acetone. Methalene chloride (paint stripper) would be best. If you can get some.

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:00:53 +0000 Tamron SP 500mm Cement separation? in Manual Focus: English : Maintenance & Repairs http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130652#130652 130652@http://forum.manualfocus.org Thanks to you both, but I'm no further on. I am a bit loath to use heat although (I do know it works with Canada Balsam but I assume that this is a more modern cement). also as the main mirror is actually on the back of these two elements, I do not want to damage same. I tried the forum again but only found this thread. I will have to try the acetone again and hope.........Unless anyone has any better ideas PLEEEEAAASSSSEEEEEEEEE Thanks to you both, but I'm no further on. I am a bit loath to use heat although (I do know it works with Canada Balsam but I assume that this is a more modern cement). also as the main mirror is actually on the back of these two elements, I do not want to damage same. I tried the forum again but only found this thread. I will have to try the acetone again and hope.........Unless anyone has any better ideas PLEEEEAAASSSSEEEEEEEEE

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:44:12 +0000 DIY SLR camera in Manual Focus: English : Off-Topic http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130651#130651 130651@http://forum.manualfocus.org I think we should all remember that some of the earlier efforts in commercial cameras could be a little crude and ugly.   Regardless, there was a tremendous amount of effort and talent that went into this.   I've got a little Atlas 12" lathe, and never EVER  would insult someone by saying  "I've done machine work."   I DO, however  have a real appreciation for those that can  and do. I think we should all remember that some of the earlier efforts in commercial cameras could be a little crude and ugly.   Regardless, there was a tremendous amount of effort and talent that went into this.   I've got a little Atlas 12" lathe, and never EVER  would insult someone by saying  "I've done machine work."   I DO, however  have a real appreciation for those that can  and do.

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:56:46 +0000 My Bronica's frst roll of B+W in Manual Focus: English : Gallery http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130650#130650 130650@http://forum.manualfocus.org Excellent job. I like framing and composition. The 2nd is maybe a tad low in contrast MACS wrote:Unfortunatly the lab left some glue on the negative Maybe time to try home development? ;)Cheers, Marty. Excellent job. I like framing and composition. The 2nd is maybe a tad low in contrast

MACS wrote:

Unfortunatly the lab left some glue on the negative

Maybe time to try home development? ;)

Cheers, Marty.

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:46:49 +0000 Which program do you use for watermarking your pics? in General : Computer Software/Hardware http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130649#130649 130649@http://forum.manualfocus.org Hello there. I agree with DS: DS wrote:Just make sure that anything you put out there that you're worried about is o.k for web use but too low res for anything else. Once something is on the net and is publicly viewable there is  no way to prevent the download. That said I watermark my photos just as a way to put a signature. I use Imagemagick inside a shell script (I work on Linux platform) to batch process entire directories at a time. This should work under Windoze as well, I recall a member here using it too.Cheers, Marty. Hello there. I agree with DS:

DS wrote:

Just make sure that anything you put out there that you're worried about is o.k for web use but too low res for anything else.

Once something is on the net and is publicly viewable there is  no way to prevent the download. That said I watermark my photos just as a way to put a signature. I use Imagemagick inside a shell script (I work on Linux platform) to batch process entire directories at a time. This should work under Windoze as well, I recall a member here using it too.

Cheers, Marty.

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:29:32 +0000 My Bronica's frst roll of B+W in Manual Focus: English : Gallery http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130648#130648 130648@http://forum.manualfocus.org MACS wrote:Thanks guys!I have been pondering about develloping on my own for a while now. I have the Patterson tanks lying around. I am afraid it will be too time-consuming and even more that I am not precise enough to do it properly...But seeing those negative ruined by bad processing makes me reconsider indeed.@al I have never used FP4+. I will put it in my next order list!@ikonpeter: I think once I get into develloping, printing will follow quickly ;) Agree with the rest, for a small investment on gear and chemicals you'll get a lot of satisfaction... and probably the results will be better and cheaper than the ones from the lab. I am personally not precise at all when developing film but I've found that b&w is tolerant enough that you can have sloppy technique and get good results (I know that firsthand :) ). I develop rolls one by one, because I have a small tank, and the normal developing time is around 25 minutes, from the camera to drying.

MACS wrote:

Thanks guys!
I have been pondering about develloping on my own for a while now. I have the Patterson tanks lying around. I am afraid it will be too time-consuming and even more that I am not precise enough to do it properly...
But seeing those negative ruined by bad processing makes me reconsider indeed.

@al I have never used FP4+. I will put it in my next order list!
@ikonpeter: I think once I get into develloping, printing will follow quickly ;)

Agree with the rest, for a small investment on gear and chemicals you'll get a lot of satisfaction... and probably the results will be better and cheaper than the ones from the lab. I am personally not precise at all when developing film but I've found that b&w is tolerant enough that you can have sloppy technique and get good results (I know that firsthand :) ). I develop rolls one by one, because I have a small tank, and the normal developing time is around 25 minutes, from the camera to drying.

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:42:39 +0000 This photographer loves Helios! in Manual Focus: English : Manual Lens: Usage http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130647#130647 130647@http://forum.manualfocus.org http://forum.mflenses.com/complete-list … 26100.html http://forum.mflenses.com/complete-list … 26100.html

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:00:34 +0000 Some thoughts on lens testing in Manual Focus: English : Manual Lens: Usage http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130646#130646 130646@http://forum.manualfocus.org Well, just as any scientist know, if one is to compare something ( any data set ) we would want to keep all the variable constant .. and Testing lens is no exception .... :)My experience with these lens ( other than the 24-70L which I had only very brief and casual usage ) mirro that of yours. Between the Pentax K 3.5 and the Flek 2.4 its more about different criteria in the imaging performance. But I say the Samsung ( Pentax FA ) 2.0 is about the best of them all and can still bought new ... would recommend that lens with no reservation Well, just as any scientist know, if one is to compare something ( any data set ) we would want to keep all the variable constant .. and Testing lens is no exception .... :)

My experience with these lens ( other than the 24-70L which I had only very brief and casual usage ) mirro that of yours. Between the Pentax K 3.5 and the Flek 2.4 its more about different criteria in the imaging performance. But I say the Samsung ( Pentax FA ) 2.0 is about the best of them all and can still bought new ... would recommend that lens with no reservation

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:57:09 +0000 Some thoughts on lens testing in Manual Focus: English : Manual Lens: Usage http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130645#130645 130645@http://forum.manualfocus.org This Sunday afternoon I decided to carry out some comparative tests on my collection of 35mm lenses, a Pentax K f3,5, Samsung (Pentax) f2, Flektogon f2,4 and the 24-70L f2.8 by Canon.  I used the Canon 450D and live view to focus, and decided on fixed manual exposure as the camera is quite unable to produce consistently correct auto exposures with a manual lens.I have a theory that the more detail in the resolved image the larger the file size, and it was on that basis that I intended to analyse the test. However I discovered that the the amount of light falling on the subject had at least as great an affect upon the result as the lens in use! Now, for you lucky people with wall to wall sunshine, this might not be a problem, but for us poor folk in Europe it makes valid outdoor testing a bit of a problem. For example the largest file was produced by the Pentax K, but that image was over exposed as the sun made a brief but spectacular appearance!The results, well, I'm not sure how meaningful they were, but, reassuringly, all of these lenses look to be pretty good. For the record, my pecking order at f4 was the Samsung, followed by the 24-70, followed by the Pentax K, followed by the Zeiss Flek, but there is not a great deal in it.  I think that my Flektogon has a bit of a de-centering problem as one side looks to be a tad less sharp than the other. This Sunday afternoon I decided to carry out some comparative tests on my collection of 35mm lenses, a Pentax K f3,5, Samsung (Pentax) f2, Flektogon f2,4 and the 24-70L f2.8 by Canon.  I used the Canon 450D and live view to focus, and decided on fixed manual exposure as the camera is quite unable to produce consistently correct auto exposures with a manual lens.

I have a theory that the more detail in the resolved image the larger the file size, and it was on that basis that I intended to analyse the test. However I discovered that the the amount of light falling on the subject had at least as great an affect upon the result as the lens in use! Now, for you lucky people with wall to wall sunshine, this might not be a problem, but for us poor folk in Europe it makes valid outdoor testing a bit of a problem. For example the largest file was produced by the Pentax K, but that image was over exposed as the sun made a brief but spectacular appearance!

The results, well, I'm not sure how meaningful they were, but, reassuringly, all of these lenses look to be pretty good. For the record, my pecking order at f4 was the Samsung, followed by the 24-70, followed by the Pentax K, followed by the Zeiss Flek, but there is not a great deal in it.  I think that my Flektogon has a bit of a de-centering problem as one side looks to be a tad less sharp than the other.

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:51:25 +0000 G1 First impressions in Manual Focus: English : Off-Topic http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130644#130644 130644@http://forum.manualfocus.org I have been looking at getting a GF1 and justified the extravagance to myself by buying it for my wife to use. In the end she decided, given a free choice of all the micro 4/3rds and entry level DSLRs that she liked the soon to be discontinued G1 best (£400 in Curries if you include Panasonic's £50 cashback, 3 yr w'ttee also, and free 8gig card). She has no interest in the technical side so the many clever auto features will I hope make it a good "spouse-cam". As I don't want more RAWs to process I was pleased to see that the in camera jpegs look fine but unfortunatele Adobe RGB isn't available in intellgent Auto modeI was slightly dissapointed that my Olympus tcon 17 front screw on teleconverter vignets badly on the kit 14-45 zoom. so rather than making it a 155mm equivalent FOV I get a 9 megapixel square crop. Shame as there appears to be no image deterioration with this. Also quickly tried Olympus' Achromatic doublet macro converter. Will report back on what macro ratio can be achieved. Seems to focus closer at the long end of the zoom.I will try and resist buying adapters and playing with strange lenses but I wonder how the Tamron 500 mirror would perform :-)Tony I have been looking at getting a GF1 and justified the extravagance to myself by buying it for my wife to use. In the end she decided, given a free choice of all the micro 4/3rds and entry level DSLRs that she liked the soon to be discontinued G1 best (£400 in Curries if you include Panasonic's £50 cashback, 3 yr w'ttee also, and free 8gig card). She has no interest in the technical side so the many clever auto features will I hope make it a good "spouse-cam".

As I don't want more RAWs to process I was pleased to see that the in camera jpegs look fine but unfortunatele Adobe RGB isn't available in intellgent Auto mode

I was slightly dissapointed that my Olympus tcon 17 front screw on teleconverter vignets badly on the kit 14-45 zoom. so rather than making it a 155mm equivalent FOV I get a 9 megapixel square crop. Shame as there appears to be no image deterioration with this. Also quickly tried Olympus' Achromatic doublet macro converter. Will report back on what macro ratio can be achieved. Seems to focus closer at the long end of the zoom.

I will try and resist buying adapters and playing with strange lenses but I wonder how the Tamron 500 mirror would perform :-)
Tony

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:35:47 +0000 Which program do you use for watermarking your pics? in General : Computer Software/Hardware http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=130643#130643 130643@http://forum.manualfocus.org Pretty mixed feelings about this all have we?  :)I like DS's tip though... Not to keen on watermarking myself, but I've seen others here on this forum using their stamps constantly... Anywayz, thanks for the tips... Pretty mixed feelings about this all have we?  :)

I like DS's tip though... Not to keen on watermarking myself, but I've seen others here on this forum using their stamps constantly... Anywayz, thanks for the tips...

]]> Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:33:13 +0000