Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-10-2010, 01:23 PM   #61
Pentaxian
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,623
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
One thing to remember is that it is relatively easy to seal a lens if the body is sealed -- it is a bigger deal to get coverage of the body as well. That means you could stick a DA 15mm lens on a K5 and then put a plastic bag over it with appropriate holes and shoot just fine. I wouldn't be too worried about shooting with the DA limiteds in most conditions, but certainly would avoid it in dust storms/rain storms.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that the K7/k5 have wonderful dust removal system on the sensor. i own the K7 and do frequent lens changes and have not had any trouble with dust on my sensor since buying it in March.
Good points. I have had precisely one spot (operator error) on the K-7 since last October. Much better than the K200D or IST DS.

Other options for sealing.
I have had good experiences with my P&S with the small version of the dicapac housing - which is basically a drybag for cameras. There is also a DLSR version of it. not so good for changing lenses, but seems like a cost effective solution if you are using a single lens in crapola weather.

11-11-2010, 02:29 PM   #62
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by paulelescoces Quote
I would maybe say otherwise regarding that Pentax will not cover Weather damaged items.... I had my K20D + 16-50 in heavy rain... both were affected as I think some water got in through the mount (had a thread on it quite recently)... Pentax replaced the 16-50 free of charge!.... thats what I call standing behind the marketing.
Awesome to know! I'm surprised to hear that they even got affected at all. MY rigs have logged many an hour in pouring rain, and have had zero issues so far. Do you have any thoughts on how moisture was able to make it in?
11-11-2010, 03:36 PM   #63
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,148
QuoteOriginally posted by opiet70 Quote
YES!!!! I love the current 12-24. It'd be perfect with WR.
I have the 12-24 and agree that it would be even nicer with WR. I was going through one of my periodic insomnia nights the other night, and got into the Pop Photo lens test sections. They rated the Pentax 12-24 "Best in Class" and I agree.

+ for the DA 12-24: I took a photo hand held up on the top of a very high ridge (about 5,500 ft altitude) after hiking a 1,900 foot elevation gain and settling the shakes down with a snack. I took it with my K10d (that's right - K10) and had MPix print a metallic standoff at 20x30 inches for the local realtor who had talked me into the hike. First off, he phoned me when he got the print. "IT's GORGEOUS" said he. This was the first metallic print I had ever ordered, so I went down and had a look to see what the comments were all about. "IT'S GORGEOUS" say I. Now if I could use that lens in the rain without worrying about it ... and if I had 16 Mp instead of 10 ... OH NO! I now have CBA to go along with my LBA.

My K10 with the DA* 16-50 went under Moul Falls with me with no problems a year ago, and it is still working as well as ever. Pentax's weather resistance is really good, and for the price or double it cannot be matched. I paid about C$1,700 for my K10 + D-BG2 grip + DA 12-24 in November, 2007.

Last edited by Canada_Rockies; 11-11-2010 at 03:41 PM.
11-11-2010, 03:43 PM   #64
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 581
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
As a landscape shooter myself I have to disagree. 17mm is an extreme focal lenght and have little use in landscape photography, although I'm sure someone is using them all the time.
I'm using 10-20mm all the time (16-32mm in full frame money) so I disagree that 17mm has little use given that a fair amount of my work is taken at 16-18mm in full frame terms.

11-11-2010, 05:20 PM   #65
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
I have the 12-24 and agree that it would be even nicer with WR. I was going through one of my periodic insomnia nights the other night, and got into the Pop Photo lens test sections. They rated the Pentax 12-24 "Best in Class" and I agree.
It's true. a DA* 12-24/4, or DA* 11-16/2.8 would be an excellent addition to the lineup. That and a DA* fast normal equivelent are the biggerst holes in the lens lineup. That and a DA* super-tele...

Put me down for one of each please!
11-11-2010, 06:02 PM   #66
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 101
If I was a landscape photographer, I'd consider that the K5's dynamic range is higher than the M9, so I wouldn't be dreaming about Leica (except the lenses of course)



Otherwise, the stats between the M9 and K5 are pretty close
11-11-2010, 06:49 PM   #67
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,538
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
As a landscape shooter myself I have to disagree. 17mm is an extreme focal lenght and have little use in landscape photography.
I agree, 24mm is as wide as I go for landscape work. Personally I prefer a neutral perspective rendered by a fast 50 on FF cameras. the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L suffers from wavy distortion that is pretty nasty to correct. And it has some the softest corners for a L lens - the Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 ED beats the 17mm f/4L in almost every respect excepting flare tolerance, where both lenses perform pretty badly.
11-11-2010, 07:00 PM   #68
Junior Member
pjtn's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 48
Original Poster
How do people think a 5D MKII and Carl Zeiss ZE 28mm ƒ2 and 50mm ƒ1.4 would compare with the Pentax K5 and 21mm ƒ3.2 and 35 ƒ2.8 Limited?

Wouldn't the Zeiss glass be better than the Pentax?

11-11-2010, 07:03 PM   #69
Junior Member
pjtn's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 48
Original Poster
Hmm, I could get my Leica if I bought an X1...
11-11-2010, 07:09 PM   #70
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,538
QuoteOriginally posted by pjtn Quote
Zeiss glass be better than the Pentax?
no, Ziess glass just different. The 28mm f/2 isn't that great on full frame, the 35mm f/2 is much better but for all it's marvels it still gets it's ass handed to it by the FA31mm f/1.8 Limited on full frame.
11-11-2010, 09:17 PM   #71
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,148
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
I agree, 24mm is as wide as I go for landscape work. Personally I prefer a neutral perspective rendered by a fast 50 on FF cameras. the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L suffers from wavy distortion that is pretty nasty to correct. And it has some the softest corners for a L lens - the Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 ED beats the 17mm f/4L in almost every respect excepting flare tolerance, where both lenses perform pretty badly.
My regular lens is the DA* 16-50, but in some circumstances, I need wider. This one is at 12mm with the DA 12-24/4. I am standing as close to the edge of this lookout as I can.



By the way, this was printed by MPix as a metallic print standoff 20"x30" and the client is elated with the results. It is now the featured waiting room image. He took down 7 other pictures and replaced them with this single image. When I went to see it, I was blown away with the quality of the print. Thanks, MPix! Not bad for a 10.2 Mp camera - the DA 12-24 certainly helped!

Last edited by Canada_Rockies; 11-11-2010 at 09:30 PM. Reason: Image not showing
11-12-2010, 06:41 PM   #72
Junior Member
pjtn's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 48
Original Poster
I just started another thread with a poll. I'd like to see what people think.

No more than one vote each...
11-15-2010, 03:31 PM   #73
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Corsica
Posts: 19
QuoteOriginally posted by pjtn Quote
Simplistic for sure. Ultimately I want a Leica, that's about as simple as it gets. Every time I mention "Leica" I think I can gear my piggy bank go running though.
What Leica are you talking about ?

- The M9 ? Not really appropriate for landscape , for example you wont master you DOF, your framing will be approximate, forget macro, forget about checking anything on the screen, it has the definition and quality of a ten years old P&S, etc... and the legendary reliability is gone because it's no more 100% mechanical but electronic.
And for sooooo much the entry is 8000 bucks + 3000 per lens minimum.

- The S2 ? Not to be obscene I don't mention prices, but also you will have to wait years to get three lenses as the production is very limited. IQ ? Not convincing, all the pro go Hassy or Phase !

- R system ? It does no longer exist !

If you get to spend that much of money, spend far less, throw your money in the latest pentax 645 most probably the most interesting MF at the moment. And don't forget, Pentax owes nothing as far as lens IQ is concerned.

Turn it the way you want, Pentax is at it best in both format, with the advent of the latest APS-c, FF is getting wobbly.
11-15-2010, 04:45 PM   #74
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12
Landscape and Leica and Pentax

Hi Peter
Well, it's my first post here - and I'm afraid I can't offer anything definitive as I don't shoot with a 5D MkII. I do use a Lieca M9 for landscapes though Testing the M9- and it does a very fine job. Dynamic range is not a problem, and the lenses are fantastic (really fantastic).

I recently bought a K5, just with a couple of lenses to start with:

35 f2.8 limited
50 f1.4 Zeiss ZK
kit lens (18-55 WR).

I bought it as the natural successor to the Olympus E1, a very much loved camera (which I gave to my son years ago).
Small solid body (smaller than the E1) weather resistant, very quiet shutter (quieter than the E1).

I'm not very enamoured of the kit lens, especially for landscape (I do landscape too). but the little 35 limited is spendid - sharp and contrasty and full of character (with a good bokeh). Reminiscent, in fact of the Summicron 50 f2 on the M9.

I don't know whether the K5 is as good / better / the same as the Canon or the Lieca. What I'm absolutely and categorically certain of is that if you're shooting landscape and printing at 24x16 and you're using the limited lenses, then you will have splendid results. Add to that, every moment of shooting with this quiet and delightful little camera will be a pleasure .

Compared to the subtle and wonderfully damped shutter of the K5, the Canon sounds rather like stamping on a tin can (with all the effect that has on sharpness).

It's not all a bed of roses - some of the focusing is a bit noisy, there seems to be a shortage of real quality wide - mid range zooms (the 16-50 not withstanding). But the limiteds are fab, so is the camera body, and the high iso . . . .

I couldn't shoot in the daytime for a week after getting the camera - so I shot in the dark:

shooting in the dark in Gent and Bergen op Zoom

All the best with your decision!
11-15-2010, 04:53 PM   #75
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12
QuoteOriginally posted by tooppy Quote
What Leica are you talking about ?

- The M9 ? Not really appropriate for landscape , for example you wont master you DOF, your framing will be approximate, forget macro, forget about checking anything on the screen, it has the definition and quality of a ten years old P&S, etc... and the legendary reliability is gone because it's no more 100% mechanical but electronic.
And for sooooo much the entry is 8000 bucks + 3000 per lens minimum.
Deary me
The M9 certainly has it's foibles, but it's increasingly being used as a landscape camera. The lack of an AA filter, together with the really splendid lenses make it a real winner.
'definition and quality of a ten years old P&S'? really - that's emotive, and hasn't any basis in reality. It does very well for resolutionagainst other full frame high MP cameras (D3x and A900 come to mind). I've not heard anyone defining the resolution of the D3x as being that of a 10 year old p&s.

I suppose it's possible you haven't even tried one?
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!
5d, camera, dslr, image, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, mkii, pentax, pentax k-5, quality, simplicity
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Please recommend a good multifunction ADF printer with good scanning quality raider General Talk 0 01-02-2010 07:03 PM
How can I get good image quality from a K-x?? Manfred Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 38 12-20-2009 08:18 PM
K or M Series - Which has the best image quality 8540tomg Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 10-05-2009 07:53 AM
K-7 image quality concern claude21 Pentax DSLR Discussion 31 06-26-2009 11:34 AM
What you care more on shopping digital camera, good quality or or good looking? emilyy General Talk 19 12-12-2008 07:35 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:36 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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