[patjp]

I thought I would post this question here to get the opinions of some veterans rather than stir up controversy in the November thread, I am thinking about joining for November but was wondering if using a Ricoh camera would be ok? I was thinking along the lines of a GXR or a GR-D, neither of which I own yet. I know this is the Pentax forums and before people have asked about NEX bodies with Pentax glass and been refused. Just looking for something a bit different. I won't be devastated by no answers

Any thoughts?

[Kona]

Seeing as Ricoh and Pentax are one now, I don't see the problem. If Samsung lenses are allowed, why not Ricoh cameras?

[mattt]

I thought I would post this question here to get the opinions of some veterans rather than stir up controversy in the November thread, I am thinking about joining for November but was wondering if using a Ricoh camera would be ok? I was thinking along the lines of a GXR or a GR-D, neither of which I own yet. I know this is the Pentax forums and before people have asked about NEX bodies with Pentax glass and been refused. Just looking for something a bit different. I won't be devastated by no answers

Any thoughts?

Some would say I'm an early adoptor - the future is nigh

Pentax A Ricoh Company

Nuff said?

[Wired]

In my opinion, since Ricoh owns Pentax, Ricoh's are a-ok.

Canikony with K glass is not.

[OzzRod]

Pentax A Ricoh Company

Hard to say no. Go for it Patrick.

[HockeyDad]

We're in the home stretch and it's looking to be a busy week for me. So, I wanted to take a quick minute to sum up my month. I hope you've all enjoyed my attempt at taking the 70-200mm f/2.8 outside it's stereotype as a "Sports Zoom". While I have only posted 1 shot per day, I have to tell you, the lens has been mounted exclusively on my K-r for the entire month. It is such a versatile lens... and SOOOO sharp!

The only consistent negative I noticed was the need to bump contrast on almost every pic, but that could just be because I like higher contrast. I did have a couple shots with some CA or magenta and/or yellow fringing (not sure the definitions on those). Always when shooting something bright against a dark background. I truly only noticed it maybe 3 times so it could even have to do with being on the edge of the focal plane or something. I was actually shocked at how I could shoot tree branches against sky or backlit subjects that were all 100% perfect. The minimum focus distance also takes some getting used to. I constantly found myself having to back up a couple feet and zoom back in to be able to focus and get the framing I wanted.

I tried to provide a variety but there are a few notable exceptions that were on my list to try that I didn't get to (yet):

• One was landscape. I'm a terrible landscape photographer in general and this lens didn't help that any. I did try several times and the closest I got was the dock photo. In all, it's probably not the fault of the lens as much as my eye just doesn't see landscape well in a photographic sense.
• Another was "street" photography. Other than the lens being anything but subtle, I think the crazy fast focus speed would make this something worth trying. I just happen to live far from busy street scenes and haven't had much time to get "on location" to try it.
• Finally, this lens is a heck of a portrait lens. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to show that off in the next couple days.

I wouldn't hesitate to use this lens for all kinds of things. In fact, it will probably replace my 55-300mm in the bag unless I'm traveling... because seriously, this beast is HEAVY and I certainly noticed it in my backpack!

[Sandy Hancock]

The Sigma 70-200 (mine is the older, non-OS version) is one of my hardest working lenses; big props for carting it around daily for the month!
I agree on its sharpness, and its usefulness for portraiture. Some of my best candid portraits have come from this "sports zoom".
I might have to try my DA*60-250 for a single in month, because it usually gets displaced by the Sigma when I'm packing my bag.

[nono]

I missed days 26 & 27 (absolutely no time on friday, and I shot a sailing regatta on saturday, got something like 1200 photos but the Industar was definitely not the right lens for this). I'm just uploading my shots for sunday and monday, will try to comment at least some of yours but I'm afraid I'm hopelessly behind. There will be no single in november for me, maybe I'll be back in a few months but I just don't have time needed for these challenges at the moment.

[pezmaker]

Hi everyone, I've been incommunicado and absent from the posts at the end of this month. Shortly after last weekend my computer started locking up when I was using picasa to import (I use ufraw for PP), and got frustrated enough that I stopped trying. Personal weakness, in the end. I could have found other ways, but I had my routine and when that was broken and jagged, I just didn't want to push through.

I again want to thank everyone for your fantastic support and comments, and the constructive criticism from time to time.

I was shooting with a Tokina 35-105mm F/3.5-4.5. I don't think this lens is quite at the same level as the "box of primes" that the pentax 35-105mm is known as, but it's no slouch either. Quite sharp across the board. It has a 1:4 "macro" mode at 105mm that I found excessively soft and "dreamy" wide open (I think this lens is 3.5 until the macro, and 4.5 at that point...), but stopped down even to 5.6 in the macro zone it was pretty sharp. F8 was tack sharp everywhere. Much like other people have said before, 35 on the "wide" end of a zoom is just not enough, I kept wanting more. That said, the wide end isn't this lens's forte... it really likes the 70-105 range, and I was fairly easily able to get a 3d type shot, even if I wasn't necessarily going for that effect.

So, to conclude, I like this lens, a lot. For the price I paid of (I don't recall, it was low, though...), I don't feel that I could have gone wrong getting this lens. I also want to thank you all again, for the support, comments, and camaraderie. I am a bit bitter with myself for not completing October, but I did complete September, and I am happy with what I did put up for Oct.

[donras]

Guess I'll followup with reflections on the month. First, thanks for the input on the photos. Nice to get some positive reinforcement, as well as critical commentary.

As for the DA* 300, it is a great lens. I had rented it before, and took the plunge and bought it last May. I typically use it for outdoor sports and dog shows, but wanted to expand my horizons with the lens. While a great lens, it is tough putting it to use on a daily basis, and I really fudged by taking a number of pictures for which shorter lenses would have been more appropriate. The moral: one can get by with fewer lenses (good for tempering LBA).

Interestingly, midway through the month I found out that the focus was off a bit and required a -3 adjustment on the K-5. Bit strange, since I did a test when I first got it and determined no change. Unfortunately, that test was done indoors under artificial light, which I later learned can introduce AF errors. I probably didn't notice because many of my photos were action photos under low light and relatively slow shutter speeds, so tended to be slightly soft anyway. I also frequently use either manual focus or tweak AF -- so AF issues don't appear.

However, with some regrets I will probably sell the lens. I just don't really need the reach that often. When I do, if light is good and I can stop down a bit, I can get by with less expensive alternatives. In lower light, I can also generally get by with the 200/2.8, and don't want to invest in either the size or cost of a 300/2.8.

Don

[ASa]

Alright, still two days left, and I'm commenting on the 25th Still plenty of time, but I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to comment my somewhat late photos.

What comes to the lens I used, DA40ltd, it's a neat little lens, but somehow I'm still not quite certain about it. The small size makes it an excellent tote-around -lens, and it spent quite some time in my regular shoulder bag alongside with my laptop and some other necessities when I'm traveling. The small size isn't too intimidating, so it's easy to take out even in crowded places and grab that shot. The IQ seems decent, but IMO it's still not to par with my M50/1.7 which is kind of a benchmark for me (No actual tests were done to confirm this, so don't shoot me on this). Also with K10D's ISO capabilities I often wished it was a stop faster. I guess using high ISOs is part of my problem with the IQ, K10D just collapses when going 800 or beyond... Another thing that I think affects my thoughts with IQ is that I'm having some backfocusing problems at least from time to time. Either I'm not used to using the AF or then it really is backfocusing. This happened especially when aiming for targets a bit further away. My one last gripe with the lens is that the MFD could be shorter. That's why I'm also looking for DA35ltd...
This was a great month and I found myself a new area, street, for photographing. I guess I still need to work with this, but now that I look at it, the FA43ltd seems pretty good alternative for this. It's not much bigger and it's just over a stop faster, however the price is a different story. While I may get that FA someday right now I'm looking for a bit longer lens to fill my collection, so maybe it's the DA70ltd, of FA77ltd, or even DA*50-135 and I just have to cope with what I currently have... I think I should learn to shoot with zooms, as I'm usually on either end of the scale where performance usually drops. Maybe I should give my kit zoom a go next month.....?
As a month this was a tricky one with a little computer problems in the middle. However I noticed that taking photos is a great relaxation, or at least an excuse to take a walk even when I don't feel like it. I think I will return on November with a new lens...

Phew, long text with little to say, but sometimes one needs open up a bit. The target audience then just has to suffer

[Wired]

I forgot my camera in the armrest of my car all weekend... its frozen.

I'll get some shots tonight and tomorrow. maybe a couple extras. I got a neat concept I want to execute... but it may not be able to come to fruition.

What can I say about the Q?
It's a blast, its a unique and fun camera. IQ and color rendition is amazing, especially straight out of camera. I have pushed the RAW files in lightroom and have gotten fantastic images, but I wanted to showcase what the thing could do without going that far.

next month, back to the K5. I was gonna grab a IIs, but I think i'll hold off on that... trying to get a D600 in my collection. Just as a companion to the Pentax setup. For lens choice? I'm down to two options... M 75-150 f4, or 77mm 1.8 FA. The DA*16-50 wants some love too however.

[jackassp]

A quick summary of the Pentax K50/1.4.

First made between 1975 and 1977, and just keeps going strong.
It hasn't let me down this month, but I will say it makes you think before taking a shot.
I have mostly only used Lightroom this month, in order to deliberately keep the PP to a minimum, and I am quite pleased with most of the results.
I was going to try it reversed for some macro shots, but I can't find my adapter!

It's a solid, fast, sharp and contrasty lens, not too hard to focus, well worth looking at. A bargain steal really.

[OzzRod]

Pentax DA 10-17mm Fish-eye

I bought this lens primarily because of the Single-In contributions of jmschrei and patjp. I’m so glad I followed their lead. Not only is this lens great fun to use by taking advantage of the distortion it can produce, with more careful thought and management of its characteristics it can produce excellent images of a more “serious” nature.

In this month’s challenge I’ve emphasised the 10mm end, thinking this would be the best way to come to terms with fishiness. However it was only in the latter part of the month that I learned to produce attractive photos with little distortion. It delivers sharp images with pleasing natural colour, seemingly best at around f5.6 to f8. At smaller apertures it can produce nice daylight starbursts as long as the sun is partly obscured, eg by a branch. Shooting into the sun produced only occasional flare, although its presence usually only became apparent on first examination of images on a screen. So much is packed into the viewfinder, lots can be missed. This includes one’s feet, or a hand out front trying to hold down a wayward strand of vegetation. Purple fringing is an occasional occurrence, usually towards the outer parts of a frame, where leaves or window frames are set against the sky. I only felt the need to eliminate this once or twice in PP.

I also offered a few posts using the long end. At 17mm the lens can produce some wonderful close-ups. Distortion is minimal but you do need to get really close - often the glass will only be a couple of centimetres from the subject.

So, should Joe or Patrick have any qualms about selling this lens to me? No, they can sleep easy. It’s an absolute bottler. After a month’s solid daily use, it’s now one of my favourite lenses and has joined my DA 55-300mm as a travel pack essential.

[patjp]

I will be contacting Pentax for my commission at once