[zkarj]

I personally have an E-M1 and have used if for the last 3 years, and its been brilliant, The Olympus Pro line of lenses are just brilliant, the other nice thing is you can also use the Panasonic lenses, and the X series of those are pretty dynamite too, I have the non Pro Olympus 75-300mm for my sport/aviation work and it for a non-pro lens is actually really nice too

What's the crop factor on the camera? I.e. what's your 300mm equivalent reach? A friend of mine in the US has one of the EM models and raves about it. I'm starting to think about looking at something other than Pentax if I can trade off the features to my liking.

I fully get that RAW is not for everyone. No worries there. That's just my personal work flow, but I'm not pushing that idea onto others at all.

I don't think I could ever go back to JPEG shooting. It's not that the K-5 cannot produce good JPEGs (it probably can, but I've never tried) but that I'm not good enough to produce great JPEGs. I simply don't use the camera enough to learn its capabilities, and when I do use it, I'm often concentrating hard on the subject so forget to think about the camera.

[awa355]

Been looking at all manners of camera types. Ones that have super fast auto focusing, others that can zoom in past the moon, yet more that can perform in the dark. Nothing seems to perform as well overall as a DSLR for most photography.

I will list my K50 this weekend and if it sells, I will upgrade, but another DSLR looks most likely, although the Olympus models mentioned, are looking good.

That K3,, some snarky questions being asked. Have bitten the bullet and started the bidding. So many cameras listed as 'body only' unless they are older models, and at least I have Pentax lenses already.

[richandfleur]

m4/3 is pretty close to APS-C really.

Think it'll apply around 1.3x crop factor to your lenses compared to what you're used to seeing.

[Transit]

...

That K3,, some snarky questions being asked. Have bitten the bullet and started the bidding. So many cameras listed as 'body only' unless they are older models, and at least I have Pentax lenses already.

I saw it the other way funnily enough.
the question was accurate and the reply was snarky hasn't helped his cause at all

[GUB]

I saw it the other way funnily enough.
the question was accurate and the reply was snarky hasn't helped his cause at all

+1 on that - I think he was caught out being slippery.

[Kiwigeezer]

+1 on that - I think he was caught out being slippery.

Not sure re. intentionally slippery, but sensible (and easy) thing would have been to edit auction description. Never great when it get's to that level, kind of takes the shine off the whole thing. Not sure, but seller rings a few bells with me, think I may have asked re. shutter count on a camera he had for sale around 18 months ago (possibly a K-01) and received a pretty snakey response then.

[Class A]

I saw it the other way funnily enough.

+1

The question was reasonable as the box suggests that an 18-135 is among the things that were "in the box it came with".
The seller also just ignored the question about the shutter count.
I wouldn't look forward to a potential post-sales discussion with this guy.

[Class A]

Not sure, but seller rings a few bells with me, think I may have asked re. shutter count on a camera he had for sale around 18 months ago (possibly a K-01) and received a pretty snakey response then.

Perhaps someone just needs to tell him how easy it is to check the shutter count?

Potentially he is just being defensive because he doesn't know how to answer the question.

[Class A]

m4/3 is pretty close to APS-C really.

The m4/3 crop factor is "2" with respect to FF, i.e., a factor of "1.25" with respect to APS-C.

That's corresponds to a 0.64 stop disadvantage compared to APS-C, whereas APS-C has a 1.17 stop disadvantage compared to FF.

[GUB]

Did you change which side of the fence you were on gamma1?

[Class A]

Did you change which side of the fence you were on gamma1?

Do you think gamma1 is a member here?

[awa355]

+1

The question was reasonable as the box suggests that an 18-135 is among the things that were "in the box it came with".
The seller also just ignored the question about the shutter count.
I wouldn't look forward to a potential post-sales discussion with this guy.

I do agree, the question was fair enough. I was looking at the seller's feedback as an estimate of the chap.


Anyway, I will most likely get swamped closer to the closing time so wont lose too much sleep. I have my limit set and wont go above that. If the camera is a good one, I can live with the lens shown. A 18-135 would be nice tho', don't have one that range.

[richandfleur]

The 18-135 has an internal motor right?

It's WR and whilst a kit lens, some users seem to swear by it. I too don't have one, but it seems the other one of 3 cheaper WR options for Oentax users, and looks to be a step up from the basic kit lens 18-55, which is also pretty good anyway.

None deserve the 'kit lens' connotations, compared to the rubbish other brands offer up.

[GUB]

Do you think gamma1 is a member here?

I suspect so

[Class A]

The 18-135 has an internal motor right?

Yes, it does.

Photozone were not impressed with the optical quality of this lens to the extent that they double-checked with Pentax whether the copy they tested was within specs. Unfortunately, Pentax confirmed that one should not expect better from this lens.

I'm not knocking the lens, but I think it is fair to say that one should not expect wonders from it towards the long end. Disappointing, given that the Tamron 18-250mm (that Pentax rebadged as well) did better in the same region.