K-7 - please help.

**Rondec** · 06-28-2010, 07:06 PM

It is the lens. Go out and buy either a used or new copy of the DA 16-45 and shoot with that and look at the results. The old kit lens just didn't sharpen up on the higher res sensors and that is why they had to release version II, but I would skip it and go for the 16-45. Quite a bit more lens for not a whole lot more money.

hangu · 06-28-2010, 07:09 PM

It would help if the first photo were in focus.

Originally posted by JeffJS

Truthfully, and I'm not saying this to be a jerk, but buy a better lens. Even the K7 Kit lens would be better. The original DA AL Kit lens was marginal at best above 6Mp (on my k10d) and I've just confirmed that it's pretty bad on my K7. Not completely unusable but not very good either.

Taken with the original kit lens

Taken with a DA*16-50

Both taken with the same aperture, f7.1, from the same distance.

I don't expect you to run out and buy a DA* lens but it's just a demo to show that the problem may NOT be the camera.

JeffJS · 06-28-2010, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by hangu

It would help if the first photo were in focus.

It Is.

hangu · 06-28-2010, 08:30 PM

Originally posted by JeffJS

It Is.

It's way off. The first photo is clearly back focused by several centimeters.

I'm just saying, it's not always the camera. Most of the time, it's user error.

Edit: BTW, the nutritional label in the back of the first photo is clearly legible "not significant source of nutrient", while the second photo it's blurred and completely illegible.

Still think the first photo is in focus?

Last edited by hangu; 06-28-2010 at 08:38 PM.

siva.ss.kumar · 06-28-2010, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by hangu

It's way off. The first photo is clearly back focused by several centimeters.

I'm just saying, it's not always the camera. Most of the time, it's user error.

Edit: BTW, the nutritional label in the back of the first photo is clearly legible "not significant source of nutrient", while the second photo it's blurred and completely illegible.

Still think the first photo is in focus?

It is back focussing. In fact the 'PENTAX' on the lens cap (top) is sharper than the 'PENTAX 16-50' on the barrel.
The letters in nutrition facts are more legible than the ones on the barrel.

If in case it IS back focussing, is it a camera error and/or lens error. Not 'user error'

(at least in this case)

hangu · 06-28-2010, 09:38 PM

Originally posted by siva.ss.kumar

It is back focussing. In fact the 'PENTAX' on the lens cap (top) is sharper than the 'PENTAX 16-50' on the barrel.
The letters in nutrition facts are more legible than the ones on the barrel.

If in case it IS back focussing, is it a camera error and/or lens error. Not 'user error'

(at least in this case)

Doubt it's because his kit lens is consistently back focusing since it's the camera body that causes back/front focusing. Since his second photo's focus was spot on, it's most likelydefinitely user error.

JeffJS · 06-29-2010, 12:27 AM

Both photos are crops. In both photos the focal point is the distance / zoom scale. Both photos are taken at a minimum distance at a downward angle. The photo of the DA* was taken at a Portrait orientation, the photo of the kit lens was taken at a landscape angle. Both are auto-focused (MF made no difference). Both are shot at f7.1. The only other major difference other than the orientation is the shutter speeds. 1/320 in the second photo, 1/1000 in the first (and the exposure had to be brought up in post), using HSS with an AF540. The distance / zoom scale on the DA* lens in the first photo, is as good as it gets using the kit lens. One other difference in the photos, the first one was taken at 43mm (with the kit lens), the other was taken at 50mm.

The distance between the lenses and the Diet Pepsi bottle is not necessarily the same (in fact, I'd bet it isn't) so it is not a valid point of reference. Yes, I still think the photo is in focus, as shot with the kit lens. Can it do better? Perhaps but the camera is Not back focusing by 'several cm'.

**Ex Finn.** · 06-29-2010, 02:54 AM

Crops or not, like they said, focus is off. Just look at the cloth/ paper towel the lenses are sitting on. The bar-code in first image is in better focus than the distance scale.

theperception2008 · 06-29-2010, 03:34 AM

Even getting a used SMC-M fast 50mm would be a great improvement to the 18-55 v1 kit lens. The DSLR is a tool and yes when used correctly will take razor sharp images... But a camera can only take as sharp a picture as what you put in front of the sensor. In this case, you are usung a kit lens designed for cameras that at the time had only 6MP-10MP at most.

Here's an analogy, you had a Honda Civic Si, nice sporty, fun. You just upgraded to an Acura NSX sports car. You wanted more power, better transmission. But you decided to save some money, so you put the tires from you Civic onto your NSX. Sure, you can do it, but will the tires be able to harness the power of the car and all it's handling abilites? I don't think so. So the same thing applies here, the higher the resolution the sensor, the better the lens needs to be. It's not always about upgrading bodies. Sometimes getting a better lens will improve the sharpness of the photograph more so than getting a newer camera. For P&S cameras, buying a new camera will generally get better pictures, but not so with DSLRs. Different tools with different rules. :-) I hope that helps.

If you want to see sharp on your K-7 on the cheap side, pick up a SMC-M 50mm f/1.7 for about $40-$60 or find a SMC-A 50mm f/1.7 for about $100. That will give you sharpness that you are looking for :-)

hangu · 06-29-2010, 05:07 AM

Originally posted by JeffJS

Both photos are crops. In both photos the focal point is the distance / zoom scale. Both photos are taken at a minimum distance at a downward angle. The photo of the DA* was taken at a Portrait orientation, the photo of the kit lens was taken at a landscape angle. Both are auto-focused (MF made no difference). Both are shot at f7.1. The only other major difference other than the orientation is the shutter speeds. 1/320 in the second photo, 1/1000 in the first (and the exposure had to be brought up in post), using HSS with an AF540. The distance / zoom scale on the DA* lens in the first photo, is as good as it gets using the kit lens. One other difference in the photos, the first one was taken at 43mm (with the kit lens), the other was taken at 50mm.

The distance between the lenses and the Diet Pepsi bottle is not necessarily the same (in fact, I'd bet it isn't) so it is not a valid point of reference. Yes, I still think the photo is in focus, as shot with the kit lens. Can it do better? Perhaps but the camera is Not back focusing by 'several cm'.

Yeah, having only 10% of the subject and the entire background in focus is all the lens' fault. It's not back focused at all, silly us for saying so.

Marc Sabatella · 06-29-2010, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by dsimaitis

There should be a way to take a plain everyday picture that has everything in focus, like with a point and shoot. Right?

Not really. Google the term "depth of field". The ability to have only a small part of a picture in focus is part of the reason some people prefer DSLR's to P&S cameras.

Quote:

I am going to a DSLR class soon, but want to know if it is me or the camera! I had a Canon Rebel at one time and did not have this problem.

You would have had you shot the exact same scene with the exact same focal length, focus distance, and exposure settings.

dsimaitis · 06-29-2010, 06:35 PM

I noticed after I posted here that there is also a thread for beginners... but, thanks for your kind response! I think I will hang out over there until I get a bit more seasoned, though... Lots to learn!!!

By the way... I have done some more practice shots and seem to be getting a -tiny- bit better... and, I do understand what you mean...

Thanks!
Davina

Transit · 06-29-2010, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by dsimaitis

I noticed after I posted here that there is also a thread for beginners... but, thanks for your kind response! I think I will hang out over there until I get a bit more seasoned, though... Lots to learn!!!

By the way... I have done some more practice shots and seem to be getting a -tiny- bit better... and, I do understand what you mean...

Thanks!
Davina

good onya !
Try picking up a nice economical Pentax M or A 50mm manual focus lens.
You might be surprised

Pete

soccerjoe5 · 06-30-2010, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by JeffJS

Truthfully, and I'm not saying this to be a jerk, but buy a better lens. Even the K7 Kit lens would be better. The original DA AL Kit lens was marginal at best above 6Mp (on my k10d) and I've just confirmed that it's pretty bad on my K7. Not completely unusable but not very good either.

Taken with the original kit lens

Taken with a DA*16-50

Both taken with the same aperture, f7.1, from the same distance.

I don't expect you to run out and buy a DA* lens but it's just a demo to show that the problem may NOT be the camera.

That first shot looks out of focus, I think it's backfocusing a bit. Check out the jar behind it, it's quite sharp.

06-29-2010, 03:34 AM	#24
theperception2008 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Łódź, Poland and Riverside, California, U.S.A Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 488	Even getting a used SMC-M fast 50mm would be a great improvement to the 18-55 v1 kit lens. The DSLR is a tool and yes when used correctly will take razor sharp images... But a camera can only take as sharp a picture as what you put in front of the sensor. In this case, you are usung a kit lens designed for cameras that at the time had only 6MP-10MP at most. Here's an analogy, you had a Honda Civic Si, nice sporty, fun. You just upgraded to an Acura NSX sports car. You wanted more power, better transmission. But you decided to save some money, so you put the tires from you Civic onto your NSX. Sure, you can do it, but will the tires be able to harness the power of the car and all it's handling abilites? I don't think so. So the same thing applies here, the higher the resolution the sensor, the better the lens needs to be. It's not always about upgrading bodies. Sometimes getting a better lens will improve the sharpness of the photograph more so than getting a newer camera. For P&S cameras, buying a new camera will generally get better pictures, but not so with DSLRs. Different tools with different rules. :-) I hope that helps. If you want to see sharp on your K-7 on the cheap side, pick up a SMC-M 50mm f/1.7 for about $40-$60 or find a SMC-A 50mm f/1.7 for about $100. That will give you sharpness that you are looking for :-) Last edited by theperception2008; 06-29-2010 at 03:37 AM. Reason: clarification

06-29-2010, 06:35 PM	#27
dsimaitis New Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 16	Thank you Marc! I noticed after I posted here that there is also a thread for beginners... but, thanks for your kind response! I think I will hang out over there until I get a bit more seasoned, though... Lots to learn!!! By the way... I have done some more practice shots and seem to be getting a -tiny- bit better... and, I do understand what you mean... Thanks! Davina

06-28-2010, 07:06 PM	#16
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	It is the lens. Go out and buy either a used or new copy of the DA 16-45 and shoot with that and look at the results. The old kit lens just didn't sharpen up on the higher res sensors and that is why they had to release version II, but I would skip it and go for the 16-45. Quite a bit more lens for not a whole lot more money.

06-28-2010, 07:09 PM	#17
hangu Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: NYC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,071	It would help if the first photo were in focus. Originally posted by JeffJS Truthfully, and I'm not saying this to be a jerk, but buy a better lens. Even the K7 Kit lens would be better. The original DA AL Kit lens was marginal at best above 6Mp (on my k10d) and I've just confirmed that it's pretty bad on my K7. Not completely unusable but not very good either. Taken with the original kit lens Taken with a DA16-50 Both taken with the same aperture, f7.1, from the same distance. I don't expect you to run out and buy a DA lens but it's just a demo to show that the problem may NOT be the camera.

06-28-2010, 07:17 PM	#18
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by hangu It would help if the first photo were in focus. It Is.

06-28-2010, 08:30 PM	#19
hangu Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: NYC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,071	Originally posted by JeffJS It Is. It's way off. The first photo is clearly back focused by several centimeters. I'm just saying, it's not always the camera. Most of the time, it's user error. Edit: BTW, the nutritional label in the back of the first photo is clearly legible "not significant source of nutrient", while the second photo it's blurred and completely illegible. Still think the first photo is in focus? Last edited by hangu; 06-28-2010 at 08:38 PM.

06-28-2010, 09:33 PM	#20
siva.ss.kumar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Chennai, India Photos: Albums Posts: 534	Originally posted by hangu It's way off. The first photo is clearly back focused by several centimeters. I'm just saying, it's not always the camera. Most of the time, it's user error. Edit: BTW, the nutritional label in the back of the first photo is clearly legible "not significant source of nutrient", while the second photo it's blurred and completely illegible. Still think the first photo is in focus? It is back focussing. In fact the 'PENTAX' on the lens cap (top) is sharper than the 'PENTAX 16-50' on the barrel. The letters in nutrition facts are more legible than the ones on the barrel. If in case it IS back focussing, is it a camera error and/or lens error. Not 'user error' (at least in this case)

06-28-2010, 09:38 PM	#21
hangu Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: NYC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,071	Originally posted by siva.ss.kumar It is back focussing. In fact the 'PENTAX' on the lens cap (top) is sharper than the 'PENTAX 16-50' on the barrel. The letters in nutrition facts are more legible than the ones on the barrel. If in case it IS back focussing, is it a camera error and/or lens error. Not 'user error' (at least in this case) Doubt it's because his kit lens is consistently back focusing since it's the camera body that causes back/front focusing. Since his second photo's focus was spot on, it's most likelydefinitely user error.

06-29-2010, 12:27 AM	#22
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Both photos are crops. In both photos the focal point is the distance / zoom scale. Both photos are taken at a minimum distance at a downward angle. The photo of the DA* was taken at a Portrait orientation, the photo of the kit lens was taken at a landscape angle. Both are auto-focused (MF made no difference). Both are shot at f7.1. The only other major difference other than the orientation is the shutter speeds. 1/320 in the second photo, 1/1000 in the first (and the exposure had to be brought up in post), using HSS with an AF540. The distance / zoom scale on the DA* lens in the first photo, is as good as it gets using the kit lens. One other difference in the photos, the first one was taken at 43mm (with the kit lens), the other was taken at 50mm. The distance between the lenses and the Diet Pepsi bottle is not necessarily the same (in fact, I'd bet it isn't) so it is not a valid point of reference. Yes, I still think the photo is in focus, as shot with the kit lens. Can it do better? Perhaps but the camera is Not back focusing by 'several cm'.

06-29-2010, 02:54 AM	#23
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	Crops or not, like they said, focus is off. Just look at the cloth/ paper towel the lenses are sitting on. The bar-code in first image is in better focus than the distance scale.

06-29-2010, 05:07 AM	#25
hangu Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: NYC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,071	Originally posted by JeffJS Both photos are crops. In both photos the focal point is the distance / zoom scale. Both photos are taken at a minimum distance at a downward angle. The photo of the DA* was taken at a Portrait orientation, the photo of the kit lens was taken at a landscape angle. Both are auto-focused (MF made no difference). Both are shot at f7.1. The only other major difference other than the orientation is the shutter speeds. 1/320 in the second photo, 1/1000 in the first (and the exposure had to be brought up in post), using HSS with an AF540. The distance / zoom scale on the DA* lens in the first photo, is as good as it gets using the kit lens. One other difference in the photos, the first one was taken at 43mm (with the kit lens), the other was taken at 50mm. The distance between the lenses and the Diet Pepsi bottle is not necessarily the same (in fact, I'd bet it isn't) so it is not a valid point of reference. Yes, I still think the photo is in focus, as shot with the kit lens. Can it do better? Perhaps but the camera is Not back focusing by 'several cm'. Yeah, having only 10% of the subject and the entire background in focus is all the lens' fault. It's not back focused at all, silly us for saying so.

06-29-2010, 06:27 PM	#26
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by dsimaitis There should be a way to take a plain everyday picture that has everything in focus, like with a point and shoot. Right? Not really. Google the term "depth of field". The ability to have only a small part of a picture in focus is part of the reason some people prefer DSLR's to P&S cameras. Quote: I am going to a DSLR class soon, but want to know if it is me or the camera! I had a Canon Rebel at one time and did not have this problem. You would have had you shot the exact same scene with the exact same focal length, focus distance, and exposure settings.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-29-2010, 07:16 PM	#28
Transit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Whanganui NZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,624	Originally posted by dsimaitis I noticed after I posted here that there is also a thread for beginners... but, thanks for your kind response! I think I will hang out over there until I get a bit more seasoned, though... Lots to learn!!! By the way... I have done some more practice shots and seem to be getting a -tiny- bit better... and, I do understand what you mean... Thanks! Davina good onya ! Try picking up a nice economical Pentax M or A 50mm manual focus lens. You might be surprised Pete

06-30-2010, 10:38 AM	#29
soccerjoe5 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,343	Originally posted by JeffJS Truthfully, and I'm not saying this to be a jerk, but buy a better lens. Even the K7 Kit lens would be better. The original DA AL Kit lens was marginal at best above 6Mp (on my k10d) and I've just confirmed that it's pretty bad on my K7. Not completely unusable but not very good either. Taken with the original kit lens Taken with a DA16-50 Both taken with the same aperture, f7.1, from the same distance. I don't expect you to run out and buy a DA lens but it's just a demo to show that the problem may NOT be the camera. That first shot looks out of focus, I think it's backfocusing a bit. Check out the jar behind it, it's quite sharp.