Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-24-2013, 06:42 AM   #1
Veteran Member
DavidSKAF3's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Tompkins County, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 542
Optimum K-5 / 16-45 f/4 Settings

The guy who sold me the 16-45 f/4 yesterday sent me a message saying that originally he used the lens with a K-7, and it delivered very sharp results.

But when he got the K-5, he said he did not get the best, expected sharp results with the same 16-45 until he made some camera setting adjustments.

Why would this be?

Do you feel you need to make deliberate changes to your camera's deeper settings depending on the lens? My instinct is to leave everything neutral. Actually I don't even know what my choices are. I guess I mean like deeper menu options for sharpness or contrast or whatever, not just shutter/aperture/focus parameters.

Or would this be just a K-5 thing with the 16-45 in particular? Or maybe his particular K-5 or 16-45 or whatever?


Last edited by DavidSKAF3; 11-24-2013 at 06:48 AM.
11-24-2013, 06:51 AM - 1 Like   #2
Veteran Member
TenZ.NL's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Below sealevel
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,100
I think he ment auto focus adjustment (menu C4, 26) because his combo was front- or backfocussing. I wouldn`t worry now, just go out and take some shots, if you feel your pictures aren`t sharp then you can allways fiddle around with the AFadjustment. For exact finetuning you would need a focuschart and a tripod.
11-24-2013, 07:02 AM   #3
Veteran Member
DavidSKAF3's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Tompkins County, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 542
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by TenZ.NL Quote
I think he ment auto focus adjustment (menu C4, 26) because his combo was front- or backfocussing. I wouldn`t worry now, just go out and take some shots, if you feel your pictures aren`t sharp then you can allways fiddle around with the AFadjustment. For exact finetuning you would need a focuschart and a tripod.
Well, if it turns out I need it, I do have a low-end Manfrotto travel tripod from Best Buy. I actually kind of like it, even though it's simple. Not many bells and whistles, just a lightweight durable tripod that collapses pretty small. Thanks for the reply!

BTW what is back-focusing? Are there places where you can get in trouble with the law if you get caught doing it? LOL

Last edited by DavidSKAF3; 11-24-2013 at 07:06 AM. Reason: spelling
11-24-2013, 07:04 AM - 1 Like   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,364
My 16-45 did not AF accurately (back focus) with my K10D. But when I got a K-5, no problems. I did not have to do any AF adjustment.

11-24-2013, 07:09 AM - 1 Like   #5
Veteran Member
TenZ.NL's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Below sealevel
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,100
QuoteOriginally posted by davids8560 Quote
Well, I have a low-end Manfrotto travel tripod from Best Buy. I actually kind of like it, even though it's simple. Not many bells and whistles, just a lightweight durable tripod that collapses pretty small. Thanks for the reply!

BTW what is back-focusing? Are there places where you can get in trouble with the law if you do it? LOL
Should be enough. Here is some reading and a downloadable focuschart: Jeffrey Friedl's Blog
Front- or back focus is when you focus on a certain point but the camera/lens focus is a little off, no voyeurism involved here

You can read about in the link.
11-24-2013, 07:13 AM   #6
Veteran Member
DavidSKAF3's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Tompkins County, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 542
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by baro-nite Quote
My 16-45 did not AF accurately (back focus) with my K10D. But when I got a K-5, no problems. I did not have to do any AF adjustment.
Thanks for both those links to back focus explanation! It really explains the issue and is very helpful! I am new here and I am finding this site to be extraordinarily friendly and helpful! Thank you guys, so much! What about all those compact cameras I used to use? Do they have focus discrepancies nobody knows about from mass production?
11-24-2013, 07:22 AM - 1 Like   #7
Veteran Member
TenZ.NL's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Below sealevel
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,100
Could be allthough you would have, in theory, less sample variation. DSLR`s are more vulnerable because of the very nature of the concept (changing lenses on a mount, all being loose parts and not nescessary produced or assembled at the same time) OTOH, most compact are dirt cheap and might be less carefully assembled then a DSLR I guess.

This is just guessing, I`m not into the assemblyprocesses of both types of camera`s.

Last edited by TenZ.NL; 11-24-2013 at 07:30 AM.
11-24-2013, 09:12 AM - 1 Like   #8
Veteran Member
EarlVonTapia's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Vancouver
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,152
QuoteOriginally posted by davids8560 Quote
What about all those compact cameras I used to use? Do they have focus discrepancies nobody knows about from mass production?
Cameras with smaller sensors have a much larger depth of field. I will let a math nerd do all the calculating, but suffice to say, when you have a massive depth of field, front/back focusing issues just tend to not be noticed.

This is also why it's hard to get those fun depth of field effects with smaller cameras.

There's also the issue of manufacturing tolerances. Lenses have a range for their tolerances. So do the bodies. Combined, it can lead to noticeable front/back focus issues..

Here is my favorite article on the subject:

LensRentals.com - "This lens is soft" and other myths

I wouldn't worry too much about it. These issues are just a part of the game. I once bought a lens brand new that needed adjustment on my K30. Fed up with the hassle, I sold it at a loss. The buyer later reported to me that he tried it out on a few of his bodies and found no adjustments were needed. Go figure.

11-24-2013, 09:27 AM   #9
Veteran Member
DavidSKAF3's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Tompkins County, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 542
Original Poster
Thanks for your comments. I find as I read about it that there's quite a lot of talk in particular about the 16-45's errant tendencies and design weaknesses. Going back a long ways!

Hope I get a good copy!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
f/4, k-5, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, results, settings, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Optimum Q settings? ScooterMaxi Jim Pentax Q 10 03-28-2013 11:07 AM
For Sale - Sold: pentax 16-45 f:4 & Pentax-a 35-105 f:3.5 ChuyQ Sold Items 2 05-11-2012 08:38 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K-5, 16-45 f4, 55-300, 35 f2.4, 50 f1.4. flash 360 Gloria Sold Items 10 12-09-2011 06:38 PM
For Sale - Sold: K's: 24 f/3.5 , 35 f/3.5, 135 f/3.5, trade for 16-45 jsherman999 Sold Items 19 10-11-2009 10:28 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:48 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top