Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-09-2010, 06:28 AM   #181
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
This is all irrelevant. My point is Pentax vs the competition. How can you seriously advise a Pentax camera with a 35/2.4 when the competition offers a cheap 35/1.8. Do you really think Pentax is not able to build a good f/2 lens in this range? It's a pure marketing decision and Hoya should be criticized for this, not excused in any way.
I guess the problem is that if Pentax built an optically excellent $200 35/F1.8 they'd cannibalize sales of other lenses in their lineup - notably the DA40, and possibly the FA31 and FA43 as well.

FWIW, I started a K-r group on Flickr. I encourage folks to join.

09-09-2010, 06:32 AM   #182
Veteran Member
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
QuoteOriginally posted by Miserere Quote
What about subject movement blur? ISO is not a substitute for a fast lens when you're shooting things other than landscapes. If you can shoot it at f/2.4 and high ISO, you can shoot it with even better IQ at f/1.8 and 1 stop lower ISO.
Despite having less noise I think the resulting picture could be worse at f/1.8. We've yet to see the reviews, but I think the DA35/2.4 could perform better wide open than the competition.

QuoteQuote:
Some of us care about better IQ. The target audience of this lens doesn't or can't tell the difference. Where is the lens for those that do care? Pentax has let those shooters down once again.
If the DA35/2.4 turns about to be a very sharp lens with excellent bokeh, then the above statement is false.
09-09-2010, 06:39 AM   #183
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 318
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Nothing confusing about it. You are assuming this thing is as good as the FA 35. How can you label it better? Go back and look at my complete post. I also like how you ignored my edited post.
Dude, I just saw you edited your post. I'm not sitting around refreshing these forums every 5 seconds - and I definitely have no ill-will or intent against you or your posts. I already edited the earlier post.

I think it's safe to say, judging by the construction of the optical elements, that the new DA is fairly close to the old FA 35mm. We'll soon know for sure.
09-09-2010, 06:40 AM   #184
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Simpsonville, SC
Posts: 98
Looks like a nice incremental upgrade of the already fine K-x. One question for the group...I have a K10d and I find it difficult to judge sharpness with the lcd screen. Everything looks soft in the camera, but on my computer screen they are tack sharp. How much easier is it to evaluate sharpness on a 921,000 dot screen (as on the K7) vs the 230,000 dot screen on the K10d ?

09-09-2010, 06:42 AM   #185
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Closer To The End
Posts: 11
I cannot wait to put my hands on this camera. It solves the biggest dilemma I didn't get the K-x for - AF points. and of course amount Lenses. Please release more Lenses!
09-09-2010, 06:49 AM   #186
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 349
QuoteOriginally posted by Sblast Quote
I cannot wait to put my hands on this camera. It solves the biggest dilemma I didn't get the K-x for - AF points. and of course amount Lenses. Please release more Lenses!
Don't forget the vey loud shutter, did they fix that? Otherwise looks great to me.
If it was weather sealed, it would be incredible.
09-09-2010, 06:51 AM   #187
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by ewalk Quote
. . .

I think it's safe to say, judging by the construction of the optical elements, that the new DA is fairly close to the old FA 35mm. We'll soon know for sure.
I see no reason for the optical performance not to be similar unless Pentax used Ghostless Coating on the rear element or redesigned the rear element. The biggest issue will be durability. While the were o.k., the FA 50, FA 28, FA 35 lenses weren't the must rugged lenses.
09-09-2010, 06:57 AM   #188
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Call that an attack? Get a grip. You threw the first stone by saying...
Saying what? That those who don't agree are necessarily bad photographers?

QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Forget slow zooms.
I suppose Pentax wants us to move from slow zooms to slow primes?

QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
All product releases are the result of marketing decisions so what the heck is your point?
The point is the user didn't benefit from that decision. A 35mm f/1.8 is the benchmark set by the competition. I would have accepted more easily a 30mm f/2.4 which would have almost no competition.

Now people try to rationalize saying that:
- it's stabilized. OK but so is the Sony. And stabilization doesn't fix everything, when shooting human you try to stay at 1/60s or above, if you shoot non moving subjects a tripod is much better anyway.
- it will be very good wide open. Guess what, the Nikon 35/1.8 and the old Pentax 35/2 are all very good wide open, I don't expect miracles here.

Let's stop making excuses for poor Hoya decisions. f/2.4 is not what we wanted. Do a poll and see how many people will prefer the f/2.4 vs the f/1.8.

And if it's true that it's the same design as the FA 35 it's even more shameful that they crippled it by half a stop.

09-09-2010, 06:59 AM   #189
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Crescenta, CA
Posts: 7,452
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Pentax made photocamera, not video. It's cool!

Wow, that's fairly incredible...
09-09-2010, 07:02 AM   #190
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I was going to say that the could have at least put the camera on a tripod, supplemented the office lighting with some hot lights, used an external mic to pick up their voices better, and had a couple of more K-7s there for B-roll...

...but then I saw the unicorn. And all was good.
09-09-2010, 07:05 AM   #191
emr
Guest




BTW, why is the K-r bigger than the K-x?

K-x: "approx. 122.5(W) x 91.5(H) x 67.5(D)mm (4.8 x 3.6 x 2.7 inches)"

K-r: "Approx. 125mm(w) x 97mm(H) x 68mm(L) (excluding protrusions)"

Is there a technical reason or is it for a marketing or ergonomics aspect?

EDIT: the size difference is obvious in this dpr picture too:

09-09-2010, 07:10 AM   #192
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,368
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Cheesy, soo cheesy...
09-09-2010, 07:11 AM   #193
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,368
QuoteOriginally posted by emr Quote
BTW, why is the K-r bigger than the K-x?

K-x: "approx. 122.5(W) x 91.5(H) x 67.5(D)mm (4.8 x 3.6 x 2.7 inches)"

K-r: "Approx. 125mm(w) x 97mm(H) x 68mm(L) (excluding protrusions)"

Is there a technical reason or is it for a marketing or ergonomics aspect?

EDIT: the size difference is obvious in this dpr picture too:
The prism is bigger to allow illuminated points in the view screen? That's what Image Resource was guessing.
09-09-2010, 07:11 AM   #194
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
EMR, the size difference could be in part due to the larger LCD. Could part of it be due to an improved AF system that Falk alluded to earlier?
09-09-2010, 07:12 AM   #195
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Urkeldaedalus Quote
The prism is bigger to allow illuminated points in the view screen? That's what Image Resource was guessing.
Does it have a prism or pentamirror? I doubt a Pentamirror would be bigger in the K-r than the K-x. However, if it has a prism, that is a different story.
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!
pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature First pictures with K-x miss_alexx Post Your Photos! 4 11-18-2009 03:19 PM
what is going on in these pictures? throndor Photographic Technique 16 09-11-2008 03:14 PM
various pictures gokenin Post Your Photos! 1 01-08-2008 06:59 PM
New pictures Flaco Post Your Photos! 6 03-16-2007 12:14 PM
two pictures, what are they? Heinrich Lohmann Post Your Photos! 5 01-24-2007 02:17 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:38 PM. | 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