06-05-2015, 12:55 PM
Quote:"a bit of a shame about the level of build quality", "I have to snap a couple of times with refocusing just to make sure I have one sharp image." "I'm glad I just got used FA 50/2.8 macro which combines the same optical design with the excellent build quality of the good-old FA macro lenses."
Wow. A highly recommended lens… I'm sure, I'm totally wrong and I'm also sure it's only early morning because I can't detect the 4 ½ ☆ in most of the sample pictures. Maybe, if I staid with Pentax, I also would be satisfied with such a hmmm, hey, why not call it "lens"? I never find out. But if a mechanical crappy thing gets this kind of marks, the earlier version must fly beyond the 5 ☆ horizon?
These images are heavily post-processed (mentioned in the sample section actually) and compressed by Dean.
I would have chosen a less aggressive approach and higher quality settings but I didn't plan to shoot any field images in the first place. Thus I am grateful that Dean provided them.