Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-28-2013, 09:02 AM   #121
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam G Quote
It would need at least one kind of sync port, and another port for external power.

I bought a 540 II, and then kicked myself mightily for assuming those features, present on its predecessor, would have been retained. Serves me right for acting on assumptions rather than hard information.
A reasonable assumption. I had no idea they dropped pro on the replacement.

11-28-2013, 10:46 AM   #122
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 804
Maybe some HD variants of existing lenses ? Lens like the DA*300 SDM deserves an update - HD coating, focus limiter, faster DC motor. I hope...
11-28-2013, 10:51 AM   #123
Senior Member
harrisonww's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London Ontario
Posts: 149
Pentax new lenses?

I have trouble with Pentax apertures in their lenses. The zoom lenses also are NOT fast enough for sports events im sorry to say. A 3rd party lens like the sigma 70-200mm is faster, but still not as fast or as sharp as nikon. Would be awesome if pentax came out with a lens for sports that had FAST af and 2.8 or better.

The other thing i would LOVE to see pentax do is bring out a 24, 26, 28 or 30mm fixed lens 1.4 would be nice . Something that has some weight to it and some GLASS, a larger focal ring and not made of light ugly plastic. No offense i am not a huge fan of the 31 limited. For 1000 its rediculous, Pentax should be able to bring out a standard 28, 30mm lens that is made well and durable for under 700. HSM or SDM should be included.

Is that too much to ask? lol. I am a huge fan of the pentax k3 and the pentax gear i have, just two lenses that I could really use and would help pentax battle with the two big brands, fixed short lens and a fast zoom lens.
11-28-2013, 12:03 PM   #124
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Greater Montreal Area
Posts: 736
Maybe the long awaited TC?

11-28-2013, 12:21 PM   #125
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,323
A set of automatic AF macro extension tubes would be wonderful. My Kenko aren't even available any more. Macro shooters and birders with big lenses use them all the time.
thanks
barondla
11-28-2013, 02:07 PM   #126
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,069
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
A set of automatic AF macro extension tubes would be wonderful. My Kenko aren't even available any more. Macro shooters and birders with big lenses use them all the time.
thanks
barondla
Yes, that's a very pertinent claim.
11-28-2013, 03:27 PM   #127
Senior Member
Lucky-Luc's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Montreal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 274
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
Yes, that's a very pertinent claim.
Yes yes and yes
11-28-2013, 03:45 PM   #128
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 28
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
Why? The current lens is one of the more recent in the current lineup. Or do you just want a HD-coated version of it?
Hi gazonk, no, I'm not greedy, although HD would be nice!!. But the build quality is questionable [but then I'm not a fan of plastic] and current or not it has PF problems, and although I don't use AF in macro mode, the AF is not brilliant. I have several macro lens in my collection Pentax 50mm F4, Tamron f2.8 90mm macro SP DI 272E, Tamron f2.5 90mm macro.etc and although it's a matter of debate I find little difference in the IQ of those and the 100mm. So I just think there's room for improvement, but that doesn't mean I'm not considering one for my next lens!!

QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Last ring flash is pretty recent is it not ?

And why a new 100 macro? Isn't the current one good enough ?
Hi thibs

Well, I seem to have caused a couple of ripples in asking for improvement in kit!!! I think I have, hopefully, explained my thoughts on the macro without denigrating it as it is a good lens with great IQ but, for me, it could be better..
The Ringflash is fairly recent but again I'm just saying it could be improved. I'm also not happy that third party manufacturers don't seem able to produce a compatible reliable working Ring Flash.
I notice nobody has questioned my highlighting a better more long range remote control..........now why would that be??!

11-28-2013, 04:13 PM   #129
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,770
QuoteOriginally posted by BLACKDRAGON Quote
But the build quality is questionable [but then I'm not a fan of plastic] and current or not it has PF problems, and although I don't use AF in macro mode, the AF is not brilliant.
Which lens are you talking about? The DFA 100mm macro WR is metal construction, I don't believe I've ever seen any PF on it and for a macro the AF is quite good except when it misses and goes all the way out and back. I'm guessing you are thinking of the earlier DFA 100 f/2.8 (non-WR version) The newer WR version has IMHO the same build quality as the Limited series. Not trying to start (or continue) an argument, I just thought perhaps you and Gazonk and Thibs are talking about different lenses.

QuoteQuote:
a new up-graded ring flash to cure some long standing problems in that area.
What problems are you having with this? I have the much older AF080C ring flash which is all manual on modern cameras. I thought the AF 160FC was updated to P-TTL? I had considered getting the newer one but if it has issues maybe I'll just stick to my manual version.
11-28-2013, 10:28 PM   #130
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,260
QuoteOriginally posted by BLACKDRAGON Quote

Hi thibs

Well, I seem to have caused a couple of ripples in asking for improvement in kit!!! I think I have, hopefully, explained my thoughts on the macro without denigrating it as it is a good lens with great IQ but, for me, it could be better..
Yep you did. Focus limiter is obvious I agree, I was annoyed they scrapped it (I think the FA had it, DFA did not).
Otherwise I don't really see except if you use it as standard tele too, then AF speed without AF limiter could be annoying.

QuoteOriginally posted by BLACKDRAGON Quote
The Ringflash is fairly recent but again I'm just saying it could be improved. I'm also not happy that third party manufacturers don't seem able to produce a compatible reliable working Ring Flash.
Mmm the FGZ-160? What's with it? I'm surprised by your comments. Not because you're wrong but because I'm not even sure anybody uses one often enough on this forum. I don't remember thorough test (but the forum review). But then I lurk mostly in Rumours section...

QuoteOriginally posted by BLACKDRAGON Quote
I notice nobody has questioned my highlighting a better more long range remote control..........now why would that be??!
Maybe because that's nothing but obviously missing right now
11-28-2013, 11:44 PM   #131
Forum Member
detritus's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 54
QuoteOriginally posted by BLACKDRAGON Quote
The Ringflash is fairly recent but again I'm just saying it could be improved. I'm also not happy that third party manufacturers don't seem able to produce a compatible reliable working Ring Flash.
I notice nobody has questioned my highlighting a better more long range remote control..........now why would that be??!
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
What problems are you having with this? I have the much older AF080C ring flash which is all manual on modern cameras. I thought the AF 160FC was updated to P-TTL? I had considered getting the newer one but if it has issues maybe I'll just stick to my manual version.
I have the AF160FC. its only benefit is that u have it in a neat, contained package without the hassle of a heavy custom mount and DIY diffusers. the modelling lights are also great for finding bugs in the woods at night.

but PTTL is not really value adding. I set it to manual for better consistency, especially on night shoots.

i like my gear and use it often. but i also recognize that it is an outdated product line if you compare it to what the competition had come up with.

i have, more than once, wanted to consider a 5DIII + MP-E 65 + MT24EX setup.

macro shooters looking for the most versatile set-up would seldom choose pentax. the lack of original and 3rd party accessories is a real bummer. barring DIY setups, the most easily available setup a pentax shooter can work with is a 1:1 macro lens with a raynox. and once u mount the raynox, u cant use the AF160 anymore...

and i would hate to have to tell the story of how difficult it was for me to find a set of PK-A extension tubes. it is almost embarrassing when i have to explain to new pentaxians that macro accessories are really limited for pentax shooters.

i do admit that this is a pretty niche market and market forces are at work when 3rd party manufacturers choose not to include pentax /k in their accessory range, or when hoya, then pentax (and now ricoh) have to make tough decisions about the customer base they can make money out of.

this means that we have to recognize the facts for what they are: the range is pretty limited and existing customers are having to trawl ebay for legacy gear, do a DIY, or move to a system that meets their needs.
11-29-2013, 12:51 AM   #132
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
QuoteOriginally posted by detritus Quote
I have the AF160FC. its only benefit is that u have it in a neat, contained package without the hassle of a heavy custom mount and DIY diffusers. the modelling lights are also great for finding bugs in the woods at night.

but PTTL is not really value adding. I set it to manual for better consistency, especially on night shoots.

i like my gear and use it often. but i also recognize that it is an outdated product line if you compare it to what the competition had come up with.

i have, more than once, wanted to consider a 5DIII + MP-E 65 + MT24EX setup.

macro shooters looking for the most versatile set-up would seldom choose pentax. the lack of original and 3rd party accessories is a real bummer. barring DIY setups, the most easily available setup a pentax shooter can work with is a 1:1 macro lens with a raynox. and once u mount the raynox, u cant use the AF160 anymore...

and i would hate to have to tell the story of how difficult it was for me to find a set of PK-A extension tubes. it is almost embarrassing when i have to explain to new pentaxians that macro accessories are really limited for pentax shooters.

i do admit that this is a pretty niche market and market forces are at work when 3rd party manufacturers choose not to include pentax /k in their accessory range, or when hoya, then pentax (and now ricoh) have to make tough decisions about the customer base they can make money out of.

this means that we have to recognize the facts for what they are: the range is pretty limited and existing customers are having to trawl ebay for legacy gear, do a DIY, or move to a system that meets their needs.
I agree with everything you say. I shoot long, wildlife, and am pleased that with the K3, someone figured that I was a customer worth going after. My metz 50 and a beamer works reliably on p-ttl, which wasn't the case on the K-5. The metz with a diffuser, as a slave off the on body flash was fun for shooting with my 100mm 2.8 macro. The body begs for long glass, a tc, etc.
I don't know what is coming, but I wouldn't be surprised if these niche things get announced and produced over the next while. There are big holes in the Pentax offerings. One was filled last month. We shall see what the next month brings. I hope that they announce something that you are looking for.
11-29-2013, 01:54 AM   #133
HYS
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 306
And what about the FF idea?
Is it HD and K-3 enough?
11-29-2013, 05:39 AM   #134
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,323
I know a lot of the products we want are expensive to produce and will take time. The extension tube shouldn't take much. They already have parts bins full of body and lens mounts. Just make a few tubes to hook these together. Don't think this is a niche product. Pentax has three maco lenses in the line up!

Wish I had bought more than one Kenko tube when they were new. Still using the Pentax bellows.
thanks
barondla
11-29-2013, 06:22 AM - 1 Like   #135
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Yep you did. Focus limiter is obvious I agree, I was annoyed they scrapped it (I think the FA had it, DFA did not).
Otherwise I don't really see except if you use it as standard tele too, then AF speed without AF limiter could be annoying.
I will take Quick-Shift ahead of a focus limiter, any day.

One trick I've found using the D FA 100mm for telephoto, is to reset the focus ring to infinity after each series of shots. It is quick to focus this way and rarely hunts. If you start out with a focus point less than the subject distance, it almost always wants to rack in, and rarely hits the target when racking out. As soon as it misses focus or looks like it may hunt, I go for QS.

QuoteOriginally posted by detritus Quote
i have, more than once, wanted to consider a 5DIII + MP-E 65 + MT24EX setup.

macro shooters looking for the most versatile set-up would seldom choose pentax. the lack of original and 3rd party accessories is a real bummer. barring DIY setups, the most easily available setup a pentax shooter can work with is a 1:1 macro lens with a raynox. and once u mount the raynox, u cant use the AF160 anymore...
I agree that Pentax is limited for you, but what you are describing is not just macro, it's extreme macro. Not many people shoot extreme macro, 1:1 is tough enough. And not many people would pay over a thousand dollars for a lens that only shoots macro.

I don't think there's much chance that Pentax will fill this niche. Either you will to have to go with Canon, or keep being creative. If you unscrew the Raynox from its mount, and screw the element into a 43-49mm adapter, would you be able to use the ring flash?

What about tubes? I see the Kenko auto tubes for sale once in a while. They're a lot cheaper than an entire Canon outfit. I bought a $20 Vivitar A 2X TC and removed the glass. An inexpensive Auto 3X TC with the elements removed would allow more magnification, and still maintain auto exposure. Use both together and a Raynox on the end.

BTW, have you seen this site? Good stuff: Extreme Macro Photography
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
Fungus or something else? yusuf Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 08-21-2013 06:10 AM
Landscape Something Else is There Jimbo Post Your Photos! 5 08-17-2013 05:23 PM
Gold fungus or something else? ripit Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 04-22-2013 03:23 AM
*RUMORS, careful!*Good news and bad news (K5 going, something else coming) masloff Pentax News and Rumors 252 01-07-2012 12:20 PM
K1D coming before the end of 2008 time-snaps Pentax News and Rumors 29 01-27-2008 11:40 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:47 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