Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-24-2012, 10:46 AM   #46
Senior Member
mervis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 108
QuoteOriginally posted by slackercruster Quote
No AA is a deal breaker. No way no how. That simple.
Wow.

Are there any serious cameras being made that use AAs? Are any about to be made? What exactly is wrong with dedicated batteries?

03-24-2012, 10:54 AM   #47
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
The Kx or Km aren't that much bigger than the K-01 and has a viewfinder

OMG, get a clue, does the Kx or Km have 1080p30,25,24 or 720p60 with full manual control in video with focus peaking ? Does the K-5 have that ?
03-24-2012, 11:21 AM   #48
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,872
Try the Pentax Q with OVF addon?
03-24-2012, 12:18 PM   #49
Banned




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,683
Unfortunately the K-5 does not have focus peaking; and I really wish that it did.

03-24-2012, 02:17 PM   #50
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
Sticking with the K-5 does not solve the size problem and doesn't give you access to peaking, but is wonderful in every other way. Using the K-01 with one of those add-on contraptions is rather ludicrous, IMO. They cannot substitute for a proper EVF.

Your third choice is to move to another brand of mirrorless and use a K-mount adapter. You give up only AF, but if you're manually focusing that's a non-issue anyway. Sony has peaking. Micro-Four-Thirds doesn't, but I'm happy with a zooming focus zone in my EVF. Plus you get a little "shimmer" effect when you hit focus. Works well. I can shoot with the camera up to my eye and the Olympus IBIS working on my behalf. An SLR is still better for sports, however, due to the camera response time.

There's a solution for every problem, unless you're emotionally bound to a single brand.
03-24-2012, 02:38 PM   #51
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by isaacc7 Quote
Don't understand all the angst about no viewfinder, I shot in Yemen for a year without a viewfinder. That's pretty much the definition of bright sun. I'm also amused to hear that people didn't shoot with cameras without viewfinders until recently. I guess no one ever shot in bright sun with Hasselblads, Rolleiflexes, press cameras or view cameras. Yes, they had shades (which you can also put on the k-01 of course) but they had far dimmer screens and no AF.
There are other reasons for a viewfinder. A small camera needs as much stability as possible, and you do not get that holding the camera out from your body. Happy as I am for your Yemen shooting, try doing the same in a dark club. I've nailed shots at 1/10s but only because I have a viewfinder combined with IBIS.

Second, I don't want my screen shedding light pollution over everyone else trying to enjoy a gig, whether that's a dance recital, rock band, or sound artist. Sure, lots of people are ignorant that way, but I have no desire to be one of them. Generally I turn off the screen on my SLR for the same reason, though it does depend on the context.

Third, a viewfinder allows you to nail focus with thin depth of field, since you can focus-recompose in a fraction of the time, and without the risk of a slight shift in your posture varying the distance to the subject.

Fourth, a viewfinder does indeed help when light is behind you or glare on the screen is overt. If you have never had this problem you must pick your shooting moments to accommodate the limitations of the LCD. In any case, denying that it is a problem for others requires a good deal of arrogance.

Fifth, the efficiencies of using a viewfinder allow me to save battery power and get more shots on a charge. This is especially the case for mirrorless cameras which tend to suck juice. (It's not a big deal with my Pentax SLR, but then again I'm not using the LiveView mode.)

True, technical and medium format cameras do not always have the same need for a viewfinder system. Just as well no-one was writing about them!
03-24-2012, 03:14 PM   #52
Site Supporter
Heinrich Lohmann's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Airdrie, Alberta Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,846
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I'm not old enough to know this but I've read that back-in-the-day 135 film wasn't for "serious" photographers.
In the early fifties I worked for a rather large photo outfit, we did large and small groups (mostly military) and used Linhofs 8x10, 5x7 and 4x5. Color film only, (unmasked Agfacolor). For casual work we had 6x9cm Plaubel Makina II s.The same film became available in 35mm, some of us had Leica II f s. We were under strict orders not to develop our 35mm film in the big tanks as this might pollute them. Talk about 35mm phobia, but we did anyway. Except for the Plaubel none of these cameras had viewfinders neither.
03-24-2012, 03:17 PM   #53
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 87
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
There are other reasons for a viewfinder. A small camera needs as much stability as possible, and you do not get that holding the camera out from your body. Happy as I am for your Yemen shooting, try doing the same in a dark club. I've nailed shots at 1/10s but only because I have a viewfinder combined with IBIS.

Second, I don't want my screen shedding light pollution over everyone else trying to enjoy a gig, whether that's a dance recital, rock band, or sound artist. Sure, lots of people are ignorant that way, but I have no desire to be one of them. Generally I turn off the screen on my SLR for the same reason, though it does depend on the context.

Third, a viewfinder allows you to nail focus with thin depth of field, since you can focus-recompose in a fraction of the time, and without the risk of a slight shift in your posture varying the distance to the subject.

Fourth, a viewfinder does indeed help when light is behind you or glare on the screen is overt. If you have never had this problem you must pick your shooting moments to accommodate the limitations of the LCD. In any case, denying that it is a problem for others requires a good deal of arrogance.

Fifth, the efficiencies of using a viewfinder allow me to save battery power and get more shots on a charge. This is especially the case for mirrorless cameras which tend to suck juice. (It's not a big deal with my Pentax SLR, but then again I'm not using the LiveView mode.)

True, technical and medium format cameras do not always have the same need for a viewfinder system. Just as well no-one was writing about them!
Never said that there weren't advantages to viewfinders, simply pointing out that you can indeed shoot without one even in bright sun. I was trying to go against the meme that the K-01 is "useless" in bright sun and brought up other cameras as examples of how people have been doing it for years. There's no reason why shooting with a viewfinder body should be any less stable than a camera with a viewfinder. I have a book that was published in the 60's I believe about shooting with Rolleiflex cameras. One of the most common techniques was to pull down against the strap to steady yourself when using slow shutter speeds. The same can be done with the K-01. Hold the K-01 like a regular SLR, with your elbows in. Shorten up the strap and move your hands out slightly so that there is tension on the strap. Simply let your arms swing down slightly from the elbows. When done properly, the camera should be about 6-8 inches from the face, and you have have three points of stability.

We were talking about using cameras without viewfinders outside, that's why I mentioned the larger formats. They also frequently didn't have a viewfinder system and were used outside, see the connection? Where in the world did shooting at concerts come from? Shall we start talking about shooting football, underwater photography, and follow focus at track and field as other areas where the k-01 isn't going to work well? Sheesh...

I was only pointing out that people have been shooting outside in the sun without viewfinders for a very long time. I never once told the original poster that she was wrong, never said that there are never any problems (every camera has some problems in some situations), and I never said that the k-01 is the perfect camera for everyone. I merely pointed out that it is useable outside based on my experience in some very bright sun in the middle east. I also suggested that perhaps a shade could be used if she liked the camera but didn't like it outside. WHere is the arrogance?

03-24-2012, 03:19 PM   #54
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
OMG, get a clue, does the Kx or Km have 1080p30,25,24 or 720p60 with full manual control in video with focus peaking ? Does the K-5 have that ?
Wow... you've read the rest off the topic right and you know what it is about???
I'm not bashing the k-01 in anyway.

The OP texasgirl loves her K5 but she was eyeing the k-01 because of the smaller size it would fit in her purse everyday however her eyesight is not perfect any more so she needs a viewfinder.
I've no idea where you find out or read that she wanted video with her camera as well???
So the Km and the Kx are surely options, they are smaller and lighter than the K5 and shoot good photos, from what i read those cameras would be perfect for what she is looking for.



ps. you are suggesting a *ist DS2 and you dare to write something like that to me...
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-01-forum/179940-no-vf-whats-girl...ml#post1880205
03-24-2012, 03:26 PM   #55
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,450
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Sticking with the K-5 does not solve the size problem and doesn't give you access to peaking, but is wonderful in every other way. Using the K-01 with one of those add-on contraptions is rather ludicrous, IMO. They cannot substitute for a proper EVF.

Your third choice is to move to another brand of mirrorless and use a K-mount adapter. You give up only AF, but if you're manually focusing that's a non-issue anyway. Sony has peaking. Micro-Four-Thirds doesn't, but I'm happy with a zooming focus zone in my EVF. Plus you get a little "shimmer" effect when you hit focus. Works well. I can shoot with the camera up to my eye and the Olympus IBIS working on my behalf. An SLR is still better for sports, however, due to the camera response time.

There's a solution for every problem, unless you're emotionally bound to a single brand.
Robin if you will wait a month or two you will be able to buy a Pentax camera that has a 100% optical viewfinder, the button placement you like, a better sensor and Focus Peaking. You will also be able to buy a Pentax dSLR with a scaled-down button set, maybe an EVF and focus peaking. You will also probably be able to buy a K-5 as presently configured until at least year-end (if John Carlson was correct that PRI will keep producing them despite new product introductions).

Early next year you will be able to buy a K-Zero format body with improved internals an a dedicated OVF attachment that will have FoV markings for the DA21, DA40 and DA70 lenses (as well as the clones offered as XS variants).

You might even be able to buy a Pentax dSLR with an amazing feature set and a sensor we've been asking about for a decade.

Of course, if you are emotionally repelled by a certain brand because you believe it jilted you - then you needn't wait.
03-24-2012, 04:19 PM   #56
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Wow... you've read the rest off the topic right and you know what it is about???
I'm not bashing the k-01 in anyway.

The OP texasgirl loves her K5 but she was eyeing the k-01 because of the smaller size it would fit in her purse everyday however her eyesight is not perfect any more so she needs a viewfinder.
I've no idea where you find out or read that she wanted video with her camera as well???
So the Km and the Kx are surely options, they are smaller and lighter than the K5 and shoot good photos, from what i read those cameras would be perfect for what she is looking for.



ps. you are suggesting a *ist DS2 and you dare to write something like that to me...
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-01-forum/179940-no-vf-whats-girl...ml#post1880205
That was a comment for someone who wanted AA batteries and I have the *ist DS2 that takes AAs. I don't understand why people like you keep beating a dead horse subject like no VF in the K-01 when there are a zillion posts about it . The Km and Kx have been discontinued for a few years now. If she wants a small camera to put in a purse she should get the GX1 with 14-42 zoom and EVF.

03-24-2012, 04:27 PM   #57
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 19
Original Poster
Anvh -- You are exactly correct in your summation of my situation. Also, although I didn't mention it, I have absolutely no interest in video -- only still.

Thank you for your help.
03-24-2012, 04:28 PM   #58
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
The K-5 is not that much larger than the Kx.
03-24-2012, 04:35 PM   #59
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
The slr camera is not always better to hold in low light because of their extra stability. I can hold my Pentax Q slower than my K-7. The slr is let down because of the extra vibration it generates when flipping the mirror.

A scientist once showed he could study any film negative and tell you if it was taken with an slr or not ( no mirror lock up). Using a mirroless camera on a tripod with a big lens is an eye opener. The slr "forbidden zone" shutter speed range, from approx. 1/4 to 1/30, doesn't exist when you loose the mirror. Haven't tried the K-01 yet but it should be almost as good as the Q. All tools have their advantages and disadvatages.
thanks
barondla
03-24-2012, 04:39 PM   #60
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
The Pentax Kr will take AA batteries with the optional insert.
thanks
barondla
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!
glasses, k-01, k01, lcd, love, mirrorless, pentax k-01, stability, vf
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
People girl vlatkoufo Photo Critique 12 02-08-2012 02:47 AM
People girl vlatkoufo Photo Critique 10 01-11-2012 10:11 AM
People Baby Girl 2 Alex00 Post Your Photos! 2 06-13-2010 07:39 PM
People American Girl dadipentak Post Your Photos! 9 06-12-2010 02:01 PM
People Just a little girl chacoansun Post Your Photos! 4 06-07-2010 08:17 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:14 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