Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-02-2008, 12:51 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Norman, Oklahoma USA
Posts: 350
*Isteve
I think you need to research the statement that the K20D is the only aps-c camera that can
be use for a magazine double page spread besides Canon 1ds series. I have seen plenty of
shots in various magazines published with 4.5 mp cameras. A flat statement like you posted is just not true. A 16x20 print is no problem with an aps-c camera if the original shot is done properly.

03-02-2008, 06:23 PM   #17
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by kent vinyard Quote
*Isteve
I think you need to research the statement that the K20D is the only aps-c camera that can
be use for a magazine double page spread besides Canon 1ds series. I have seen plenty of
shots in various magazines published with 4.5 mp cameras. A flat statement like you posted is just not true. A 16x20 print is no problem with an aps-c camera if the original shot is done properly.
Dont tell me, tell Ben He's over the moon about it.
03-02-2008, 07:01 PM   #18
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by SouthShoreRob Quote
A very valid question my friend, but the "hey go get a Canon or Nikon" answer is getting a little tired.
Not half as tiring as all these threads going on and on about Pentax AF. And anyway its an obvious question. Why complain that your SUV doesnt corner like a sportscar?
QuoteOriginally posted by SouthShoreRob Quote
As I've said numerous times, I love my Pentax. I've never used a SLR other than my K1000, my *ist DS, and now my K10D; well except for when pressed into duty b/c "hey you look like you know what you're doing", lol.
So why get so hot under the collar about the AF? Its not so bad that its useless, we are talking degrees here not absolutes, and to be honest have used all the other cameras so frequently mentioned I am more or less convinced that their supposed superiority contains a large margin of hype.
However if I wanted to shoot indoor hockey as opposed to portraits and landscapes I would have bought a Canon. They have the right balance of features (no SR, waterproofing etc but 6fps and fast AF) and the right fast lenses. I would never have even considered a Pentax when I bought my *istD.
QuoteOriginally posted by SouthShoreRob Quote
I'm not asking Pentax to make a Canon clone - far from it. What I'm asking - as are the rest of the posters like me, I think - is why would Pentax release two flagship cameras the K10 and now K20 in successive years without re-doing the AF system? (Actually didn't somebody post the fact this is basically the same AF - with tweaks - as the original *ist D?)
Firstly, have you actually compared the AF systems on the *istD and k10D? Then you know that thats a pretty meaningless point. Its night and day better and faster.
Secondly, they didnt upgrade the hardware because at the time the K10D they already had more AF points and more cross type sensors than ANY other camera at the same price point, so they improved the algorithms and motor power and made it faster. Unfortunately they had no SDM lenses so it was not as fast as some Canons but it was a good bit better than the A100 I tried.
Thirdly, Pentax are the smallest of the big 5 camera companies by far, but despite that they managed to make many innovations on the K10D which for many of us were stunning so I was not too bothered about the AF because it worked fine. Like I said you can leave out SR and sealing, keep the 10MP sensor and upgrade the AF INSTEAD but I would not have been happy since I could have just bought a Canon 30D instead.
For the K20D Pentax had a limited budget (and were being taken over by Hoya) and for the K20D the priority was upgrading the sensor. All of the folks complaining about the AF now would be complaining even louder if they had kept the 10MP sensor I assure you. You cant have your cake and eat it too.
Fourthly, I have compared the K20D back to back with a K10D and a D300 and for locking in low light its not far behind the D300 (and thats without the AF light) and its quite a bit better than the K10D. On the other hand now I have used the firmware hack to reset and tune the AF on my K10D and switched to SDM lenses, I am pretty happy with the K10D as well.
QuoteOriginally posted by SouthShoreRob Quote

In the meantime, I make do with my purchase choice. The solution is simple. Hockey is a 60 minute game. I shoot 200 or 300 shots a game, deleting roughly half of them as I go. In the end, I generally have one "quality" shot per player to post.
Then please PLEASE accept that the K20D is not a 40D or a D300 and never will be and stop worrying about it. You have a bunch of stuff neither of them do, and at the end of the day you can switch any time you want.
03-02-2008, 07:41 PM   #19
Veteran Member
palmor's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North of Boston, MA
Posts: 798
QuoteOriginally posted by racinsince55 Quote
High ISO? The need for, IMO, is simply an excuse to not be willing to get the equipment required to get the job done.
Finis
You know what your right, what have I been thinking. I do a lot of birding and at the "good" hours of dusk and dawn there isn't as much light, so instead of hoping for good high ISO capability I'll spend my cash on that 400 f/2.8.. oh wait there isn't a Pentax 400 f/2.8, ok I'll settle for the 400 f/4.. oh damn, no 400 f/4... well I need the reach so I guess I'll deal with the 400 f/5.6.. oh wait no 400 f/5.6. Ok how about the 300 f/2.8.. oh, nothing in Pentax, OK I guess I can buy the Sigma but I'll have to wait god knows how long and it really doesn't do the same as a fast 400mm lens.

I guess I'll just use my slow used 400 f/5.6 and hope for being able to shoot at a stop or two higher ISO.. so I guess that is an example of the need for high ISO is huh?

Of course I'm being a little bit argumentative, my point is that as a system Pentax has to accommodate all sorts of photographers, instead of fast glass they can at least provide better IQ at higher ISO's. Then think what will happen when they finally bring out fast glass.

What gets me is people telling other people what they need or don't need. If I want/need high ISO, fast AF or more fps then whats what I want/need. If you don't then you don't. There isn't need for either side to whine about it in ways that don't provide constructive discussion about how Pentax can improve their offerings.. and whether or not you need any of these things there is NOTHING wrong with Pentax improving their offerings.


Just IMO of course .


Last edited by palmor; 03-02-2008 at 08:00 PM.
03-02-2008, 08:09 PM   #20
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by palmor Quote
You know what your right, what have I been thinking. I do a lot of birding and at the "good" hours of dusk and dawn there isn't as much light, so instead of hoping for good high ISO capability I'll spend my cash on that 400 f/2.8.. oh wait there isn't a Pentax 400 f/2.8, ok I'll settle for the 400 f/4.. oh damn, no 400 f/4... well I need the reach so I guess I'll deal with the 400 f/5.6.. oh wait no 400 f/5.6. Ok how about the 300 f/2.8.. oh, nothing in Pentax, OK I guess I can buy the Sigma but I'll have to wait god knows how long and it really doesn't do the same as a fast 400mm lens.
You've got it all wrong. Clearly you should be bringing about a half dozen 1kW Fresnels with you to light the damn birds...
03-02-2008, 09:31 PM   #21
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by racinsince55 Quote
Much has been said about Pentax lack of focus speed. "I can't get shots of my two year old." I've seen some post.
Hmm - yes its amazing how many Pentax owners have 2 year olds

I am also wondering why on earth you would chase a 2 year old round the living room with an SLR trying to burst off shots at ISO1600? My mother had over 200 photoalbums of the kids growing up, mostly taken on simple all-mechanical TLR cameras and they were all pretty much in focus.

I took a bunch of pics for my friend the other day of his sons birthday party and used a Ricoh GX100, with an external auto flash and the focus mode set to snap (fixed focus) mode and F4.6

Zero shutter lag and a DOF of 23 feet with the flash freezing the action at ISO100. Worked great, nearly all keepers. However my neice did FAR better even than me.........using a video camera.

Is the advanced SLR camera market driven by parents who got bad gear advice?
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!
camera, cameras, dslr, focus, fps, iso, photographers, photography, post, shot, shots, sports
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LR3.2 - How happy are you with the Auto Tone performance in general? ducdao Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 3 10-24-2010 04:16 PM
[Auto-ISO] so, is the K5 and Kr brave enough to use max iso? Reportage Pentax K-5 13 10-24-2010 03:30 PM
K-x auto bracket slow fps? justDIY Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 03-18-2010 03:58 PM
IS there Auto Focus assist in Auto with the Metz 58? madman6767 Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 01-26-2009 06:27 AM
so let's assume better AF, more FPS, higher clean ISO and maybe FF nostatic Pentax News and Rumors 32 01-05-2009 11:16 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:41 AM. | 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