[ivanvernon]

Well, my AF *is* working. Now that I had to use the whole setup menu by creating the file on the SD card and turning on with the battery cover open ordeal, I was able to fix it. It took a while and +230 to fix! I'm now left with a hesitant AF. When I got the camera a couple of years ago it was a bit dirrty and needed lots of cleaning, but I have not done anything inside the mirror box yet. I see LOTS of dust in the viewfinder... probably not in the mirror itself but maybe I can clean up some at least.

Fully working K10Ds are about 100 bucks these days so just get yourself another one if you want AF - or get a K200D, or a K-m.

I would definitely get another camera before fixing this one, but it is not important as I have held to all my cameras as new ones were introduced and now have on hand this K-10 plus K-20, K-7, K-5, K-3, K-1 and even a K-01 yellow brick. Keep up your good work!

[goatsNdonkey]

Most of the time I've had my K10D I didn't have many auto-focus lenses, but it didn't have any trouble focusing the ones I had. I have more AF lenses now, but still shoot mostly MF lenses with it because it is very MF-lens-friendly. Now, I mainly shoot AF lenses with the K-R I got last winter.

[ChristianRock]

I bragged enough in the "New acquisition" thread about the Pentax LX plus 7 SMC Pentax lenses I got today... so I won't do it here again.

Just posting a K10D picture taken with the SMC 50mm f/1.2... with fungus, but it's still an amazing lens.

wide open @f1.2


@f1.2 - This one has a bit of sharpening added (just the standard from RawTherapee - this lens is sharp!)


The lens was essentially a freebie... it wasn't even listed in the facebook ad and just happened to be attached to the film camera...

[Dartmoor Dave]

I bragged enough in the "New acquisition" thread about the Pentax LX plus 7 SMC Pentax lenses I got today... so I won't do it here again. Just posting a K10D picture taken with the SMC 50mm f/1.2... with fungus, but it's still an amazing lens.

Even I can tell that the bokeh is beautiful in those, and bokeh is something that I never usually notice at all. Looking forward to seeing lots more from that lens, with hopefully a few around f/8 or f/11 too to see how it renders stopped down.

As for your $100 haul of outrageous goodies, I'll just do the polite British thing of shaking your hand and saying, "Well done, old chap. Good show." Then leave the room to quietly vent my jealousy by kicking a hole in a wall.

[ChristianRock]

Even I can tell that the bokeh is beautiful in those, and bokeh is something that I never usually notice at all. Looking forward to seeing lots more from that lens, with hopefully a few around f/8 or f/11 too to see how it renders stopped down.

As for your $100 haul of outrageous goodies, I'll just do the polite British thing of shaking your hand and saying, "Well done, old chap. Good show." Then leave the room to quietly vent my jealousy by kicking a hole in a wall.

I understand, I was the guy punching the wall a few times

Just last week, someone posted a K-50 with 18-55 and a DA 55-300 - HD WR version! for 80 dollars on facebook. It's still there but they didn't answer my message which tells me it already sold. The reason why they sold it cheap is, you guessed it, the pictures come out black... I actually really wanted that 55-300 because I've been taking soccer pictures of my son with the SMC-A 70-210mm f4 manual focus lens, since the Tamron 70-300 LD DI doesn't really compare in terms of IQ... and the Craigs (Cosina) 60-300mm f/4-5.6 which I used for a half a period also didn't work that well in bright sun, even though I wasn't shooting into the light... though I have to say that I've read threads in the past that the old A 70-210 f4 even beats the 55-300 in terms of IQ, which is why I've held off buying one in the past, especially the SMC versions that I could have bought already... but the HD coatings and resistance to flare plus aberration control, appeal to me more for my use. Imagine a bunch of boy running in the bright sun wearing white uniforms, it's every lens nightmare scenario for purple fringing it really showcases the poorly corrected designs for PF and flare.

Anyway... Others here have posted before about buying a film camera and then find out to their delight that a 50mm f/1.2 was part of the package. I never thought I'd be that guy one day

I will try to do a photo lunch walk later this week and get some pictures at various apertures. I also plan on doing a "choose the best bokeh" blind test at some point with the K 50 1.2, M 50 1.4, Rikenon P 50 1.4 and M 50 1.7. Maybe the K 55 f2 should be in there too since it's known for bokeh...

And then I need to explore the M 100 2.8... the M 150 3.5, which might be a lens I disassemble to clean because that smudge in the center has got to affect IQ and it seems cleanable, and it's supposed to be a wonderful lens... then I need to compare the M 200 f4 with my A 70-210 f4 which has kicked the behind of every telephoto I've owned including primes of the 135 2.8 and 135 2.5 varieties...

[ivanvernon]

I understand, I was the guy punching the wall a few times

Just last week, someone posted a K-50 with 18-55 and a DA 55-300 - HD WR version! for 80 dollars on facebook. It's still there but they didn't answer my message which tells me it already sold. The reason why they sold it cheap is, you guessed it, the pictures come out black... I actually really wanted that 55-300 because I've been taking soccer pictures of my son with the SMC-A 70-210mm f4 manual focus lens, since the Tamron 70-300 LD DI doesn't really compare in terms of IQ... and the Craigs (Cosina) 60-300mm f/4-5.6 which I used for a half a period also didn't work that well in bright sun, even though I wasn't shooting into the light... though I have to say that I've read threads in the past that the old A 70-210 f4 even beats the 55-300 in terms of IQ, which is why I've held off buying one in the past, especially the SMC versions that I could have bought already... but the HD coatings and resistance to flare plus aberration control, appeal to me more for my use. Imagine a bunch of boy running in the bright sun wearing white uniforms, it's every lens nightmare scenario for purple fringing it really showcases the poorly corrected designs for PF and flare.

Anyway... Others here have posted before about buying a film camera and then find out to their delight that a 50mm f/1.2 was part of the package. I never thought I'd be that guy one day

I will try to do a photo lunch walk later this week and get some pictures at various apertures. I also plan on doing a "choose the best bokeh" blind test at some point with the K 50 1.2, M 50 1.4, Rikenon P 50 1.4 and M 50 1.7. Maybe the K 55 f2 should be in there too since it's known for bokeh...

And then I need to explore the M 100 2.8... the M 150 3.5, which might be a lens I disassemble to clean because that smudge in the center has got to affect IQ and it seems cleanable, and it's supposed to be a wonderful lens... then I need to compare the M 200 f4 with my A 70-210 f4 which has kicked the behind of every telephoto I've owned including primes of the 135 2.8 and 135 2.5 varieties...

I bought a camera setup like that one time, but when the kit arrived the lens was a Pentax-M 50 f 2.0, not f 1.2!

[ChristianRock]

I bought a camera setup like that one time, but when the kit arrived the lens was a Pentax-M 50 f 2.0, not f 1.2!

Did they say it was the f1.2 in the listing? I've seen that before, and in the pictures you could clearly see an f2 lens.

[rogerstg]

Did they say it was the f1.2 in the listing? I've seen that before, and in the pictures you could clearly see an f2 lens.

Same here. I guess it's easy to type 1.2 instead of 1:2, especially from a photography novice.

[ivanvernon]

Did they say it was the f1.2 in the listing? I've seen that before, and in the pictures you could clearly see an f2 lens.

Can't remember much about details at this late date (not to mention my late age), but as I recall it was an honest mistake by a non-photographer. I have seen several similar instances, too many to be very surprised, though in these days very little surprises me.

[ChristianRock]

Even I can tell that the bokeh is beautiful in those, and bokeh is something that I never usually notice at all. Looking forward to seeing lots more from that lens, with hopefully a few around f/8 or f/11 too to see how it renders stopped down.

So here it is... first a comparison of f1.2 and f8 on the same subject... both actually render nicely with the K 50 1.2 IMHO.





And a couple at f8 and f5.6. I forgot about f11...

[Dartmoor Dave]

So here it is... first a comparison of f1.2 and f8 on the same subject... both actually render nicely with the K 50 1.2 IMHO.

Yep, I just kicked another hole in the wall. Looks like that lens has got every bit of the sharpness and microcontrast you could ever want -- real high resolution sharpness, not just the pseudo-sharpness from high edge contrast that most modern lenses rely on. One of those rare lenses that almost makes it look your camera has suddenly grown more megapixels.

[ChristianRock]

Yep, I just kicked another hole in the wall. Looks like that lens has got every bit of the sharpness and microcontrast you could ever want -- real high resolution sharpness, not just the pseudo-sharpness from high edge contrast that most modern lenses rely on. One of those rare lenses that almost makes it look your camera has suddenly grown more megapixels.

Yesterday I was reading on this forum after doing a search on the K 50 1.2, and found some threads where it's discussed... including a post from Digitalis from just a few years ago where he states that he has hundreds of lenses including over 160 50mm lenses (at the time, I'm sure it's more now!). And he says that the K/A 50 1.2 is the single best SLR lens he has ever used.*

On those pictures... I did apply my standard "landscape" one-button style in Darktable, so it has increased clarity (it's called dehaze), the default sharpening that all Darktable pictures load up with, and also increased contrast and saturation - that's because I was shooting around lunch time in the bright sun. The one of the building and water fountain used my "Sunny Day Landscape" default style which does the same as the regular landscape + a graduated neutral density to account for the top half being brighter than the bottom half. So I have to say now that the pictures that are stopped down look a bit over-sharpened to me. I should probably leave the default sharpening off!

But I'll say this, even just looking at the back screen of the K10D while I was taking these pictures, they looked extremely nice and with great colors and contrast, so I'm sure the in-camera JPEGs would have looked good as well.

Oh and by the way, with this new picture service I'm using, if you right-click on an image and click "open image in a new tab", you will see the full 10MP picture for pixel peeping...




*Ok you can send me the bill for the repair on that 3rd hole in the wall

[subsea]

A couple of images, from 2007, of the US Coast Guard sail training ship, USS Eagle, pierside at the Coast Guard Academy in New London, CT. Taken with my K-10D and FA 28-80. Unfortunately, from before I started shooting everything in RAW!

[ChristianRock]

A couple of images, from 2007, of the US Coast Guard sail training ship, USS Eagle, pierside at the Coast Guard Academy in New London, CT. Taken with my K-10D and FA 28-80. Unfortunately, from before I started shooting everything in RAW!

The K10D JPEG engine is pretty capable, as long as you expose well. Which you did!

[ChristianRock]

Here is an f8 comparison. Hopefully it will show that at f8, most or all 50mm lenses are about just as good...

K 50 1.2


M 50 f4 Macro


M 50 1.7


M 50 1.4


I had my two feet planted in the same place so the first thing that I see is that the M 50 f4 and the M 50 1.4 are a tiny bit wider than the K 50 1.2 and the M 50 1.7... I like the K 50 1.2 image best overall, though I have to say the M 50 1.7 came out really nice as well. And the M 50 f4 is super sharp but we knew that...