[GUB]

3 shot stitch from the 28mm on the K1. Hugin now struggles stitching the 28 whereas in apsc it seemed quite stable. I guess it is the amount of distortion on full frame compared to apsc.

Attached Images

 

[Kiwigeezer]

3 shot stitch from the 28mm on the K1. Hugin now struggles stitching the 28 whereas in apsc it seemed quite stable. I guess it is the amount of distortion on full frame compared to apsc.

Wow. Perhaps I'll keep saving for a K1.

[NZ_Ross]

Wow. Perhaps I'll keep saving for a K1.

I think that goes for me too. Perhaps I should stop buying lenses for a bit...

[GUB]

I think that goes for me too. Perhaps I should stop buying lenses for a bit...

Na gotta keep getting the lenses!! The thing is if you have a 20+ mp apsc now then changing models is not going to be a significant step up (opinion) . And even if the next generation apsc is going to be increased resolution your lenses are liable to be the limiting factor. FF is kinder to lens. At least that is how I thought it through but there is a few surprises. ie all the theoretical differences (less dof, softer in the corners relative to the centre, change in FoV etc ) are very real. So the dof is so thin at 1.4 that all my bokeh shots are far more difficult and often i need to stop down to get a sensible shot. But as soon as the octogon of the iris appears (as against the smooth round of wide open) then the quality of the bokeh crashes.

[NZ_Ross]

Na gotta keep getting the lenses!! The thing is if you have a 20+ mp apsc now then changing models is not going to be a significant step up (opinion)

I took about 2000 images over the last 2 weeks in the USA, and was very happy with the quality of many of them. I am well used to the K-3 now, how it performs, and what I can get out of it in a given situation. I am currently using the LX to scratch the FF 35mm itch, and see the difference with my FF lenses. The 67 is there to scratch the MF itch. I am still working towards a K-1 but that would be mid next year now...maybe - I am also planning to do a bit more travel next year, and will probably take the K-3 again for that.

Still, I am impressed with what you are getting out of your K-1

[GUB]

Still, I am impressed with what you are getting out of your K-1

Thanks for that Ross. It took a while to get going with the K1 - felt like I had gone backwards in my skill but I am away now. A lot of issues was trying to do shots too wide open - I never used to use f8 but I need it now.

[NZ_Ross]

It took a while to get going with the K1 - felt like I had gone backwards in my skill but I am away now.

I think that also happened to me when I changed from the K-5 to the K-3 - the sensor and camera control was a step up and it took a while to get used to how everything worked, and how to get good results from the new camera. I remember being frustrated with the K-3 for the first 3-6 months, as it felt like a step backwards over the results I was getting from the K-5, then I was away. Perhaps that is more common than we think when stepping up with a new camera, sensor, and controls.

[GUB]

I think that also happened to me when I changed from the K-5 to the K-3 - the sensor and camera control was a step up and it took a while to get used to how everything worked, and how to get good results from the new camera. I remember being frustrated with the K-3 for the first 3-6 months, as it felt like a step backwards over the results I was getting from the K-5, then I was away. Perhaps that is more common than we think when stepping up with a new camera, sensor, and controls.

Yeah and there was a bit of a learning curve in PP. For instance the smart sharpening I use is via an unsharp mask - I used to set the radius at 1 for my K01 - took me a while to work out that radius 2 seemed equivalent for the K1. I think it is something to do with the less enlargement of the FF.

[Transit]

Not a 17 F/4 fisheye :-(

What do you recommend? Have a few older, a pentax 35/3.5, recently acquired a DA 50 1.8. The current 21mm prime's well thought of?

The 21 was my most used lens on the K-5 series...great useful field of view and plenty sharp for cropping
there is slight distortion that the incamera bizzo sorts fine





---------- Post added 21st Oct 2017 at 01:30 PM ----------

3 shot stitch from the 28mm on the K1. Hugin now struggles stitching the 28 whereas in apsc it seemed quite stable. I guess it is the amount of distortion on full frame compared to apsc.

Stunning Came a Hot Friday shot Gub !

[GUB]

here ya go --
Pentax Tamron 90mm Macro F2.8 1:1 Lens | Trade Me

[awa355]

I had opened the bidding on a Pentax film camera with two A lenses (zooms) and a flash unit. Sadly I won, the parcel arrived, and within an hour the lot had been consigned to the wheelie bin. I now know what fungus and dust looks like. Luckily I hadn't paid too much. My first dud win for a long time.

Today I tried photographing a dog agility competition. That was harder than cycling. No time to muck about with framing a shot. The dogs were up and over and turning quicker than I could follow. The Border Collies were out in numbers. Quite a popular breed for this kind of event.

I had my Nikon today but will sneak this pic in of someone's grand daughter and the winning jump.

[GUB]

What zooms were they and how much did you pay?. I have cleaned a few primes before and intend to have a go at zooms.

[zkarj]

The dogs were up and over and turning quicker than I could follow.

Sounds like darned fantails. It'd be fair to say all my photos of fantails are of them "at rest".

Speaking of which, I have been replacing my Flickr photos with higher resolution versions over the last week or so. I've done all of 2017 for a start. Might go back further, but don't know as yet. The reason? They look a darned sight better on my retina display now. Much crisper.

I had been uploading originally with 1200 long side, then for ages at 2000 long side, then more recently at 2.7Mpix (a useful preset option in Lightroom which helps in sizing square images within reason) Now I've opted for 3200 long side (and therefore rather large square images). I arrived at that figure through some calculation, I can't remember how exactly. But they now look fantabulous even when zoomed on the Flickr site. Only a handful so far have engaged the "but don't enlarge" rule I ticked – notably massively cropped shots of Kingfishers. Worse than fantails, the blighters.

[richandfleur]

here ya go --
Pentax Tamron 90mm Macro F2.8 1:1 Lens | Trade Me

I have one of those. Really good Lens.

[awa355]

What zooms were they and how much did you pay?. I have cleaned a few primes before and intend to have a go at zooms.

GUB, they are still on the bench in the shed. I couldn't actually bring myself to tip them out. I am happy to send them to you and let you have a play with them. one is a Pentax A 28-80 which may not be as bad as I had decided at first. The other is a Pentax A70-200 f4 which has the loosest zoom in history. The front glass looks quite full of dust with some fungus. Let me know if you are interested, You can do 'whatever' with them afterwards.

I have four images here. Two are from the 70-200 at each end of the zoom range, (1st & last) and the two of the green thingy in the centre of the lawn are from the 28-80 lens.
A dull gray day with rain about to fall. The light is poor so I do not know if you can judge the state of the two lenses anyway.