[wtlwdwgn]

Is that Montana "snrain"?

Yep, including "snice" pellets.

[rayallen]

Thanks for giving those settings a try, Ray. And wow! I really do like your results in bright sunshine. You've shown that ultimately it doesn't matter how good the camera is, the thing that really counts is that the photographer has to have the creative ability to find a good composition, and the technical skills to get the focus and exposure right.

You've also started me thinking about selling off the couple of autofocus zooms that I use for family snapshots and replacing them with the 18-135mm.[COLOR="Silver"]

Thank you for your nice compliments, Dave. I let the camera work out the exposure and I use BBF (Back Button Focusing) as I find it gives me more keepers. But the composition is all mine!

Yes, I highly recommend the 18-135. It came as the "kit lens" with the K-3 but it is much more than a kit lens and it continues to amaze me. I can't fault it.

---------- Post added 24-02-17 at 08:38 AM ----------

If you keep having to "open up the shadows a bit" on sunny day shots like that one, I wonder if setting contrast to -2 instead of -1, would do that in-camera?

It brings up an interesting issue, also -- Many people will praise a lens as being "contrasty," so it seems counter-intuitive that someone would turn down the contrast in a camera! Yet we can't get away from too much contrast being the enemy of detail in the dimmer or brighter areas. It seems like the contrast we see through the lens + viewfinder system is one thing, and that recordable by the film or sensor may be qualitatively different. The former contrast, helps us see to focus more sharply on what we want sharp, and that might actually be the best function of a "contrasty" lens. But if a "contrasty" lens gave us especially "contrasty" pictures, a lot of the time that could be a bad thing.

Yes, I can see where you are coming from but the light here on a bright sunny day (like in that shot) is very contrasty and I am used to opening up the shadows in either ACR or Lightroom to even out the lighting. I doubt that decreasing the Contrast setting by 1 point would be enough to achieve that and it would apply it to the whole image and I would not want that. The way I do it now works on the shadow areas only.

[tootal2]

Did one of lenses stop working on my k10D because I didn't use it for 3 years? I been using my smart phone to take photos.

[goatsNdonkey]

Did one of lenses stop working on my k10D because I didn't use it for 3 years? I been using my smart phone to take photos.

If you want help you need to type more than a couple of short cryptic sentences in your posts. Keep in mind others might need to know a lot of specific information to help you. Like specifically what lens you are having problems with, what it is or is not now doing, and anything different about it from other specific lenses that are not having this problem. And when you tell those things, anybody trying to help you might need to have several other specific questions answered to figure out what the real problem is. I'm just trying to help you get your questions answered. Could sitting around cause a problem? Maybe, but some lenses sit around for decades and then still work fine, so that might have no relationship to whatever it is that is the problem when your try to use the lens with your K10D. Try to go into more specifics in your next post, as some people might have missed details in your other earlier very brief posts. That will help somebody help you. Okay?

[ChristianRock]

Rikenon P 50 1.4 - and great K10D colors as always!

[E-man]

Rikenon P 50 1.4 - and great K10D colors as always!

Lovely images!

[ChristianRock]

Lovely images!

Thank you!

[MrTiburon]

I've found three more of my old K10D photos. Still have tens of them hidden somewhere on my old PC and faulty external drive (copying 50MB in around 1,5h :/)...

[MrTiburon]

Some more...
(do you think admin can merge my last two posts together?)

[ChristianRock]

SMC-M 50mm f4 Macro

[paulh]

Good stuff, MrTiburon and CR!

F35-70 at the marina:

[VmaxNL]

Yesterday I got my DA 50 f1.8 lens, and today I had the time to try it in the back yard...

It is indeed a nice lense. Nice colours and nice bokey. I am statified with it.


But I had other stuff to play with:
Put on the Soligor prime Tele-auto 135mm f2.8 on f5.6 to take this picture (only converted it to grayscale, no adjustments.):


This is the same lens:



And finally I put on a Panagor Auto tele converter 2x PK with a Panagor PMC Auto Tele Zoom 80-205mm f4.5. It was just to see, what the tele converter could do. It took me a while to get this sorted out. But I think it was not that bad. On f10 I got the picture i wanted.


I hope the weather will get better soon, so I can take some more nice pictures. I plan to get to the Keukenhof this year, to get some pictures of Tulips. But before that, I will take some photo's of tulips in my garden...

[goatsNdonkey]

I took my K10D to the post office so that I could try this lens on it as soon as it arrived. Unfortunately, the sun picked the same time to disappear behind clouds that varied its light between a steely gray overcast and a less than cloudy bright. I tried something like those jpg settings of Dartmoor Dave's to see if they would punch up the images a little, but they still needed a little tweaking on the computer.

The lens in question? The 1979 Sigma F3.5(-4) 21-35mm, possibly the very first (if reports I've read are correct) "ultra-wide to wide angle" zoom lens. Before it, the only way to get below 24mm was with primes. Of course, it is only a medium-wide to wide-normal lens on a cropped sensor dslr, but that's not bad. It's one PF reviewer gives it a respectable score: Sigma 21-35mm F/3.5 - 4 Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

Just to see what it could do wide open, I shot these all wide open. I could have stopped down at least a bit had I wanted to for most of these shots, if not all. I believe I kept alternating between 21mm and 35mm, using nothing in between for this series. It will be interesting to see what the lens can do in decent light.




















All but the last of these were taken around the town of Fairview, Illinois, with the last taken in Norris.

[rayallen]

I took my K10D to the post office so that I could try this lens on it as soon as it arrived. Unfortunately, the sun picked the same time to disappear behind clouds that varied its light between a steely gray overcast and a less than cloudy bright. I tried something like those jpg settings of Dartmoor Dave's to see if they would punch up the images a little, but they still needed a little tweaking on the computer.

The lens in question? The 1979 Sigma F3.5(-4) 21-35mm, possibly the very first (if reports I've read are correct) "ultra-wide to wide angle" zoom lens. Before it, the only way to get below 24mm was with primes. Of course, it is only a medium-wide to wide-normal lens on a cropped sensor dslr, but that's not bad. It's one PF reviewer gives it a respectable score: Sigma 21-35mm F/3.5 - 4 Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

Just to see what it could do wide open, I shot these all wide open. I could have stopped down at least a bit had I wanted to for most of these shots, if not all. I believe I kept alternating between 21mm and 35mm, using nothing in between for this series. It will be interesting to see what the lens can do in decent light.

All but the last of these were taken around the town of Fairview, Illinois, with the last taken in Norris.

It looks to me like you have a keeper there. Nothing wrong with those shots. It is not a lens that I was aware of but back then I was more interested in primes.

[yucafrita]

Is someone using a split image focusing screen from Focusing Screen in the K10D? Are they any good? Is metering affected? I am playing with the idea of ordering one.

Sorry if this has been answered elsewhere, I couldnt find this...