Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-11-2014, 10:14 AM   #31
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
I like colors from K100DS better, but I have yet to shoot in daylight so maybe it's too early to judge.
First of all, congratulations to your new K-5 II.

Very good choice; you can be proud of yourself that you resisted the K-5. You'll be rewarded with much better AF.

Regarding the colours: I also prefer the colours of my K100D over the colours of my K-5 II. I'm also using Lightroom (converting RAW) and made a bit of progress by defining my own camera profiles.

You may want to check out the Adobe DNG profile editor, with which you can tweak camera profiles. Despite quite a bit of tweaking of both the Adobe Standard and also X-Rite color passport generated custom profiles, I haven't yet found a set of tweaks that would give me the same nice colour response as I am getting from the K100D.

Perhaps you'll find that you are liking the K-5 II colours as they are (note that the Adobe standard profile is quite different to the embedded (Pentax) one, though) but if you won't, you may want to look into playing with the DNG profile editor.

04-11-2014, 04:38 PM   #32
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
K5II + 18-55WR - first use

Autofocus works. Yeah, everyone said it, but you don't really understand until you see it. Massive difference. Consequently, much faster to take the picture
Lens is sort-of usable in low light, i.e. I can take shots I couldn't before and don't have to focus manually. Obviously results from 50/1.7 are much better IQ wise, but now I am fairly confident a faster zoom (like Tamron 17-50/2.8) combined with good autofocus and high ISO will allow me to take shots I didn't even attempt before.
Adding a faster lens (whether it's a Tamron f/2.8 zoom, a DA50/1.8, or another lens) will definitely allow you to take better advantage of this capability. Since the camera and a fast lens will focus well in lower light, you'll want to optimize everything for that situation.

QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
As above, pixel for pixel this looks softer than K100DS photos. Once zoom level is adjusted, they look more three-dimensional.
The K-5 IIs would come closer (perhaps match?) the K100DS in pixel-for-pixel sharpness, but the color isn't even as good as the K-5 II. However, bear in mind that focus accuracy and DOF is more critical now, so you may be seeing this come into play here. Also, lens quality is now a bigger factor, so don't judge based on the kit lens, for example.

That's interesting about it being more 3D now - makes sense, I guess. I believe the 3D appearance is more often found with Pentax lenses and cameras, compared to some other brands.

QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
I like colors from K100DS better, but I have yet to shoot in daylight so maybe it's too early to judge.
I think the colors really aren't as good, and never will be. But you'll get used to them soon enough, and be happy with them, I believe. Nevertheless, Adobe only exacerbates the situation, as they have poor camera color profiles. This is the number one reason I moved to Capture One.

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Regarding the colours: I also prefer the colours of my K100D over the colours of my K-5 II. I'm also using Lightroom (converting RAW) and made a bit of progress by defining my own camera profiles.

You may want to check out the Adobe DNG profile editor, with which you can tweak camera profiles. Despite quite a bit of tweaking of both the Adobe Standard and also X-Rite color passport generated custom profiles, I haven't yet found a set of tweaks that would give me the same nice colour response as I am getting from the K100D.

Perhaps you'll find that you are liking the K-5 II colours as they are (note that the Adobe standard profile is quite different to the embedded (Pentax) one, though) but if you won't, you may want to look into playing with the DNG profile editor.
IMO, you have to really be in love with LR to make it worth all this work. And you'll probably still be discouraged when you're done. Adobe makes it almost impossible to get this part right (do I hear rants coming from others about how their acute editing skills can overcome this, and how Adobe's color is really fine to begin with?).

QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
Additionally, I tried shooting with flash to see if I'll have any issues. I don't remember if I ever upgraded firmware of the flash and K5II is still on v1.00. Everything worked fine.
You'll still want to upgrade the camera's firmware. IIRC, I noticed AF improved even further.

Last edited by DSims; 04-11-2014 at 04:45 PM.
04-11-2014, 07:44 PM   #33
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
IMO, you have to really be in love with LR to make it worth all this work.
Well,
  1. Lightroom is full of bugs,
  2. It needs ridiculous amounts of disk space for its catalogs,
  3. Adobe apologists are unbearable.
Having said that, I really like the interface, the develop module, and the integrated means to compare images, etc.

Capture One looks very good, but it appears that what ever local adjustment you are brushing in, the result will only be shown after you have finished a brush stroke, is that right? That would unacceptable to me. I also don't like the idea of being limited with respect to number of different adjustments (layers). I don't mind conversions taking a bit longer, as long as can go crazy with adjustments if I feel I want to.

N.B., does Capture One still requires you to shoot in PEF?
Capture One 6 apparently did not apply Pentax-specific profiles to DNG files.

Well, if Lightroom ever moves into the cloud completely, I'll be looking for a new RAW converter and Capture One would be my first best bet.

Last edited by Class A; 04-11-2014 at 08:08 PM.
04-11-2014, 10:46 PM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Well,
  1. Lightroom is full of bugs,
  2. It needs ridiculous amounts of disk space for its catalogs,
  3. Adobe apologists are unbearable.
Having said that, I really like the interface, the develop module, and the integrated means to compare images, etc.

Capture One looks very good, but it appears that what ever local adjustment you are brushing in, the result will only be shown after you have finished a brush stroke, is that right? That would unacceptable to me. I also don't like the idea of being limited with respect to number of different adjustments (layers). I don't mind conversions taking a bit longer, as long as can go crazy with adjustments if I feel I want to.

N.B., does Capture One still requires you to shoot in PEF?
Capture One 6 apparently did not apply Pentax-specific profiles to DNG files.

Well, if Lightroom ever moves into the cloud completely, I'll be looking for a new RAW converter and Capture One would be my first best bet.

You have to use PEF files on the K-3, it appears (based on a sample file I viewed today on the new version, with added K-3 support). I use PEF for this reason. This doesn't bother me, because I've experienced other problems with DNG files anyway. It appears you can still apply the profiles to DNGs from some other Pentax cameras and get decent results. As I recall, they supported both PEFs and DNGs for a while, which is probably why this works on the K-5 II and IIs, for example. But now they've gone back to stating that they only support PEF files on Pentax, and I guess the K-3 proves this. C1 will still read XMP files, if you need it to (e.g. to pick up the star ratings and tags).



- LR is buggy? Interesting. I'll take your word for it, but haven't experienced it much, since I gave up on LR after using versions 1 & 2. I've used 3 and 4 a bit. LR 4 is certainly an improvement in terms of IQ, IMO. I can now get LR 5 for "free" with my CC subscription, but I don't want it.
- I didn't like the way its catalogs functioned and had to be maintained. Obviously there are proper ways to deal with it, but I didn't like it.
- Are there that many critics of Adobe? I didn't realize this. Or are Adobe apologists just such strong advocates that they sound like Adobe Sales employees, regardless of opposition or not?


For many adjustments, if you want to see them happen quickly, in real time, it helps to have a good (Open CL) graphics card. This can be challenging unless your Mac closely resembles a PC , but if you're running Windows it's pretty easy.


It certainly helps to get some training on the program so you can use it well. I like the quality of the adjustments, as well as the print and output modules. It's also easy to make a bunch of versions (just different metadata for the edits, of course) of the same image and stack them up or spread them out.


Last edited by DSims; 04-11-2014 at 10:59 PM.
04-12-2014, 03:12 AM   #35
Pentaxian
cxdoo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Limassol, Cyprus
Posts: 1,092
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
The K-5 IIs would come closer (perhaps match?) the K100DS in pixel-for-pixel sharpness, but the color isn't even as good as the K-5 II. However, bear in mind that focus accuracy and DOF is more critical now, so you may be seeing this come into play here. Also, lens quality is now a bigger factor, so don't judge based on the kit lens, for example.
I've noticed the thing about focus and DOF, but then started to zoom out a bit; having almost three times more pixels on same sensor area has to have impact on sharpness/noise. I don't really need it to be pixel perfect if at the zoom level I will be looking the picture looks sharp. But yes, I need better glass... who doesn't?

QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
That's interesting about it being more 3D now - makes sense, I guess. I believe the 3D appearance is more often found with Pentax lenses and cameras, compared to some other brands.
As a layperson, I'd say 3D effect is a consequence of softer edges, in the same way anti-aliasing makes icons/fonts less flat. Super sharp photos look to me like hyper-realistic paintings, as in not real.

QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
I think the colors really aren't as good, and never will be. But you'll get used to them soon enough, and be happy with them, I believe. Nevertheless, Adobe only exacerbates the situation, as they have poor camera color profiles. This is the number one reason I moved to Capture One.
I am more of a weekend shooter, so I don't particularly suffer from Lightroom's shortcomings; it is more a matter of laziness/convenience than any particular strength that keeps me on. Yes, I noticed that if I want to "nail it" for a particular photo I often come short, but then my monitor is nothing special too, so I don't know if it's Lightroom or combination of both. To make things worse, a couple of times I wanted to have pictures printed the guys asked for JPEGs and did additional processing on them and results were very meh. I have yet to find local printer of satisfactory quality. BTW, what kind of files should I bring them if I don't want any additional processing? As in, I want it exactly as on screen?

QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
You'll still want to upgrade the camera's firmware. IIRC, I noticed AF improved even further.
I'll definitely do it, just not yet. Let me first establish the baseline so I can see if anything feels different after.
04-12-2014, 11:59 AM   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
I don't really need it to be pixel perfect if at the zoom level I will be looking the picture looks sharp. But yes, I need better glass... who doesn't?
A decent copy of the M50/1.7 should be plenty sharp enough - certainly my A50/1.7 is.

QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
As a layperson, I'd say 3D effect is a consequence of softer edges, in the same way anti-aliasing makes icons/fonts less flat. Super sharp photos look to me like hyper-realistic paintings, as in not real.
I think this is part of it. I think it's also more than this, from what I've seen. But I haven't studied it formally. My experience just tells me there's more going on here.

QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
I am more of a weekend shooter, so I don't particularly suffer from Lightroom's shortcomings; it is more a matter of laziness/convenience than any particular strength that keeps me on. Yes, I noticed that if I want to "nail it" for a particular photo I often come short, but then my monitor is nothing special too, so I don't know if it's Lightroom or combination of both. To make things worse, a couple of times I wanted to have pictures printed the guys asked for JPEGs and did additional processing on them and results were very meh. I have yet to find local printer of satisfactory quality. BTW, what kind of files should I bring them if I don't want any additional processing? As in, I want it exactly as on screen?
LR can do pretty well these days, even though I think you can do better. You definitely should calibrate your monitor with something like an i1 Display Pro - despite the fact that it costs a bit. But you can also get pretty good monitors (including IPS ones) these days for about the same price.

You should save your files as JPGs (100% quality if possible) using the sRGB color space. In theory they should then create prints without messing them up - but often it still doesn't work out. The Canon PRO-100 is frequently on sale, and it will give you good prints.
04-12-2014, 02:49 PM   #37
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
LR is buggy?
Adobe QC is virtually non-existent and there are many bugs that have been reported years ago and still persist from version to version. You can see the large list of issues by browsing the Adobe Lightroom feedback pages.

QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
Are there that many critics of Adobe? I didn't realize this. Or are Adobe apologists just such strong advocates that they sound like Adobe Sales employees, regardless of opposition or not?
Whenever someone reports an issue or has a suggestion, certain individuals always jump to the side of Adobe explaining that you are basically an idiot (not understanding the software or its underpinning principles). Usually, these apologists have no point. They typically earn money by offering Adobe product support some sort and are hence motivated to make Adobe software look better than it is.

QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
For many adjustments, if you want to see them happen quickly, in real time, it helps to have a good (Open CL) graphics card.
Unfortunately, it is furthermore necessary to own one of a specific set of graphics cards.

Last edited by Class A; 04-12-2014 at 04:02 PM.
04-12-2014, 03:13 PM   #38
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Adobe QC is virtually non-existent and there are many bugs that have been reported years ago and still persist from version to version. You can see the large list of issues by browsing the Adobe Lightroom feedback pages.


Whenever someone reports an issue or has a suggestion, certain individuals always jump to the side of Adobe explaining that you are basically an idiot (not understanding the software or its underpinning principles). Usually, these apologists have no point. They typically earn money by offering Adobe product support some sort and are hence motivated to make Adobe software look better than it is.


Unfortunately, it is furthermore necessary to own one of a specific set of graphics cards.
Too bad about the Adobe QC.

I bought into C1 because I liked the results it gave me right away. I like it even more now that I've become familiar with the company and its employees (I became a Phase One Certified Professional). But I don't profit from advocating it, outside of the personal satisfaction if others like it (not just use it), and the hope that it will still be around for all of us to use 5 years from now.

The list isn't so specific, actually. It's just that you need at least a certain level of performance to make Open CL worth using here. So they won't even support a cheaper, slower card. The product's still quite usable without Open CL, but it helps make the global slider adjustments update to the screen more quickly than, say, 2 or 3 per second.


Last edited by DSims; 04-12-2014 at 03:25 PM.
04-13-2014, 03:49 AM   #39
Pentaxian
cxdoo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Limassol, Cyprus
Posts: 1,092
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
A decent copy of the M50/1.7 should be plenty sharp enough - certainly my A50/1.7 is.
I believe mine is. What follows below is my attempt to link photos from Flickr where I just created an account.


M50/1.7 @ 1.7 M50/1.7 @ 8.0
04-14-2014, 10:19 AM   #40
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
I'd say your M50/1.7 is sharp enough (stop it down to at least f/2 to f/2.8) to judge the output quality of your cameras.
05-27-2014, 04:30 AM   #41
Pentaxian
cxdoo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Limassol, Cyprus
Posts: 1,092
Original Poster
So here I am a month and a half later, at the same time poorer (money) and richer (some experience, but mostly, stuff). So what happened?


Since I decided I need to invest a moderate amount to improve my gear I bought the following:


K5II + 18-55 WR 678,23 EUR @ amazon.de
Tamron 17-50 303,50 EUR @ amazon.de
Pentax M 50/1.7 62,00 EUR @ fleabay
Kalahari K71k Backpack 147,99 EUR @ fleabay
2 x SanDisk Extreme 16Gb 30,00 EUR @ fleabay
Set step-up adapters 49-77mm 8,99 EUR @ fleabay
Pentacon P-k adapter 18,68 EUR @ fleabay
USB 3.0 SD card reader 4,27 EUR @ fleabay
Telescope Adapter 58,60 EUR @ cncsupplyinc


For a grand total of IMHO rather immoderate 1312,26 EUR (prices include shipping to Cyprus which is not the cheapest destination).


Now that I wrote it like this, I feel somewhat better - I like & use everything I bought (well, step-up adapters not really but that was cheap ) and yet had this massive feeling of guilt like I burned a million for no reason.
I also spent some more time using old lenses I had (SuperTakumar 300/4 & CZJ 80/2.8).

Now another round of impressions about the above, in no particulat order, just quick thoughts:

K5II - Heavy. My K100DS feels like a toy now. OTOH it better balances with heavy (non-kit) lenses. Fast. I still catch myself waiting for it to write before shooting again, even though there is no need. Quiet. I shudder every time I press shutter on K100DS now; so loud! I love ISO button & two wheels. I sorta miss IS switch. I love battery life. I got so used to viewfinder now I couldn't go back to using K100DS in anything but bright light. Still haven't tried video, don't even know how to do it.


18-55WR - haven't really used it. In bright sun comparable in performance to my old 18-55. Inside, unfortunately, too. Keeping it for an odd rainy day in Cyprus and travels.


Tamron 17-50 - I was scared of what I will get with so many stories about poor QC and build of this lens. Went through pixel peeping and doing my own calibration chart and playing with AF compensation and so on.... and you know what? It is perfectly good in real life use. I got some front/back focus feeling shooting the chart but I have yet to get it shooting real scenes. I am impressed by sharpness compared to kit, it is a huge step up. It is also a huge lens, comparatively. I get the point about flimsy cap & hood but it didn't bother me too much so far. Also didn't mind stiff focus ring.
What I got out of K5II+Tammy combo is that I feel comfortable shooting indoors without flash. And with flash the photos are really sharp. Kit can cope with flash up to about 2m distance, Tamron is sharp way further than that. I prefer kit colors
though, Tamron feels a bit cold.


Pentax M 50/1.7 - I feel at loss for not having discovered this cheap gem ages ago. I played with it a lot before K5II arrived, then I played some more before Tamron arrived, and now that I have used both for some time it's the lens I will have
on camera if I go out casually. Light, sharp, small; K100DS + M50/1.7 is a great combo for a relaxed day out in sunny street/beach. With K5II cranked up to ISO1600 great for capturing my three year old falling asleep in the evening.


Kalahari K71k backpack - This is a big bag. Compared to my Pentax sling too big. However I gladly traded smaller size for the possibility of pulling just the camera out without lenses and batteries falling out and the comfort of soft, symmetrical load of a proper backpack on my spine. Extra space doesn't hurt either; with sling I needed extra bags for other stuff, now I can comfortably pack everything. However. Before I used to carry sling every time I took a camera with me. Now I carry the backpack only if I plan on 'serious' shooting. For casual stuff I just take the camera with one lens (with or without the otherwise empty sling).

Memory cards - I had some older cards (1Gb, 2Gb and 8Gb) used with other equipment. These are significantly faster. I also had recognition/reading issues with 8Gb card so I wanted to get a completely new reduntant set. Happy with what I got.


Step up adapters - I got this because I don't really want to buy different CP filter for every lens I (plan to) have. Used to put 55mm CP filter on M50/1.7. Works.


Pentacon P-k adapter - heh this is funny. In my infinite wisdom I thought my CZJ Biometar 80/2.8 was in M42 mount. Well it wasn't. I wanted to tackle the issue of not focusing to infinity so I went online to find a how to for disassembling this lens and well, the lens looked radically smaller on all those photos. Turns out I had Pentacon6->M42 adapter contraption screwed to the lens. So i had two adapters on this thing in order to use it. The positive was that automatic stop down worked , the negative that it focused only up to 5-7m.
Now, I also decided to grease focus ring (using white lithium) as it was hard to turn in some parts. I obeyed carefully all the warnings about not losing ball bearing and I did not. However nothing was said about the bloody spring so I lost that
one. Consequently I found that hip people do that on purpose to get continous aperture so there I am. But I'll get something to fix it eventually as I really loved that clicking sound.
So now the lens focus ring turns smoothly (and aperture one too), I dropped the flimsy Pentacon->M42 adaptor-thing (I refuse to call it just adaptor as it is the same size as lens), and I am waiting for Pentacon->K adaptor to arrive. Bonus points for having M42->K permanently on 300/4.


USB 3.0 card reader - well this was a must. With the RAW file sizes, the difference in speed is huge. Bonus points for realizing the port i used for transfer was faulty and maxing on 6Mb/s (compared to ~40-45 I get now with this reader on
another port).


Telescope adapter - I love this thing. The amount of detail on Moon I could see through the viewfinder was great. Not as great as when using a 10x or 20x eyepiece but great for a photo. If only the damn thing stopped for a moment to have its
picture taken. Conclusion 1: AltAz mount sucks for photography. Conclusion 2: It sucks even more when the tripod is too flimsy for the size of scope you have. But eventually I'll get there.



So what's the conclusion?

Obviously I need more stuff!

First thing I noticed is how shaky my hands are when I really try to hold steady. Especially felt when I got M50/1.7 and Tammy. Difference between shot from a tripod + remote and handheld was significant.


Digression 1: I have a crappy tripod I paid a whole of 10EUR. I overpaid. The worst thing about it is it doesn't have a ball head so it is never level and stable. Eventually I will get that travel goodness Haie reviewed. I also have a desktop tripod I paid 9 EUR and it is great for what it is.


Digression 2: My Sony BDP-570 remote works great with K5II, both for focusing and releasing shutter. Great for home & private use however I'd feel funny taking it for a trip or any official event.

Being satisfied on wide end I wanted to see how I fare at 50mm+. For all these years I felt 50-200 was a better lens than 18-55. And in a particular scenario it is; with ample sunlight or flash when subject is no more than 3m away; these are the most pleasing photos I have from these two lenses. However, going back over photos, comparing with what I get now, I see the bulk of blurry, soft photos I have are from 50-200. And it's not just the technique; even with tripod I just don't like what I get. Yes, it is vastly better with K5II than with K100DS, and yes, now I get many more usable shoots of my daughters' shows, but I am not impressed. Not like with Tammy, 50/1.7 or Biometar 80/2.8 (before I 'fixed' it).

Which brings me to the actual point of this novel. I'm rather disappointed by Pentax offering for enthusiast beginner stepping up from the kit.
I see a sort of logical progression in kit zooms -> better zooms -> primes at points of interest. At least I'd like to have better zooms for family trips/events before I indulge in more primes.
So my next step should have been DA* 16-50 (or 16-45 or 17-70) instead of 18-55. But there Tamron is either faster or cheaper or has better IQ or some combination of it. So money goes to Tamron for 17-50. I lose WR but it's acceptable considering what else I get.

But above 50mm I just have no idea what to do.


Options and ideas:


18-135WR - I don't feel like giving this kind of money for something that is more or less equivalent to 18-55 + 50-200. Even if it's better (how much?), it's not faster, so indoors I'd be at similar state as I am now.


DA* 50-135 - I really want to want to buy this. I can live without 135+. I can sort of justify the price. I don't really know what to think of autofocus speed but I'd be shooting mostly portraits, street and kids so I guess it would be ok. I am scared of SDM story. Maybe it won't die on me multiple times as horror stories go, but will it work after 2, 3, 5 years? Will Pentax release a new version with better motor (like in 18-135) and I'll be stuck with this forever?


DA* 60-250 - I could swallow the price and f4 if I convince myself this is IT. But I am scared of size. Not because it's too heavy; I am masochistic enough to lug it around if I feel the photos will justify the effort. I am scared people will shoot back if I point this thing in their direction. I also dislike the fact it extends as it zooms; another intimidating trait. Generally I am embarrassed to stand out as a guy with a camera, and I just feel this would be too much of a lens for me ever to feel comfortable in public.


Tamron 70-200 - Ditto. I like the price & reviews. I don't like the size.


55-300WR - Mixed feelings about this. Feel like it isn't much of a step up from 50-200. And I don't really care about long end.

Big thank you to everyone who hang with me until the end. I am probably not going to buy anything anytime soon, but wanted to share the thoughts. Maybe it helps someone who was/is in same situation I was 2 months ago.
05-27-2014, 05:46 PM   #42
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
But above 50mm I just have no idea what to do.


Options and ideas:


18-135WR - I don't feel like giving this kind of money for something that is more or less equivalent to 18-55 + 50-200. Even if it's better (how much?), it's not faster, so indoors I'd be at similar state as I am now.


DA* 50-135 - I really want to want to buy this. I can live without 135+. I can sort of justify the price. I don't really know what to think of autofocus speed but I'd be shooting mostly portraits, street and kids so I guess it would be ok. I am scared of SDM story. Maybe it won't die on me multiple times as horror stories go, but will it work after 2, 3, 5 years? Will Pentax release a new version with better motor (like in 18-135) and I'll be stuck with this forever?


DA* 60-250 - I could swallow the price and f4 if I convince myself this is IT. But I am scared of size. Not because it's too heavy; I am masochistic enough to lug it around if I feel the photos will justify the effort. I am scared people will shoot back if I point this thing in their direction. I also dislike the fact it extends as it zooms; another intimidating trait. Generally I am embarrassed to stand out as a guy with a camera, and I just feel this would be too much of a lens for me ever to feel comfortable in public.


Tamron 70-200 - Ditto. I like the price & reviews. I don't like the size.


55-300WR - Mixed feelings about this. Feel like it isn't much of a step up from 50-200. And I don't really care about long end.
The 55-300 is a worthwhile improvement over the DA50-200. If you get one, don't buy a new WR version unless you need it. Buy a used DA or DA L. However, I still don't think it's the right choice for you.


With the IQ you're getting used to with the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and the M50/1.7, you need to get one of these:

Tamron 70-200/2.8 or Pentax DA*50-135/2.8. The story will be the same with the colors, however - the Tamron will look more sterile or cold to you. And I think the Pentax is even sharper and performs better near wide-open. But they're both very good. The Tamron will give you much better AF performance if you're shooting action. But I prefer the IQ from the Pentax. You could also consider the cheaper Tokina 80-200/2.8, which has good output but is harder to find.


Leave the DA*60-250 alone unless you're sure about it. Believe it or not, you can get almost as good IQ out of the F70-210/4-5.6 (Takumar or Pentax) for well under $150 (sometimes as low as $60, depending on the version and the seller). Of course this lens has a slower aperture. And it's a bit weak beyond 180mm. But if you compare the two directly you may have trouble justifying the cost of the DA*60-250. To me the DA*60-250 images are good but not special. The DA*50-135 images are special. You can get an F70-210/4-5.6 and a used DA*50-135 for a reasonable price, keeping the 70-210 for when you want small and cheap for travel.

Last edited by DSims; 05-27-2014 at 05:53 PM.
05-30-2014, 03:57 AM   #43
Pentaxian
cxdoo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Limassol, Cyprus
Posts: 1,092
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
Tamron 70-200/2.8 or Pentax DA*50-135/2.8. The story will be the same with the colors, however - the Tamron will look more sterile or cold to you. And I think the Pentax is even sharper and performs better near wide-open. But they're both very good. The Tamron will give you much better AF performance if you're shooting action. But I prefer the IQ from the Pentax. You could also consider the cheaper Tokina 80-200/2.8, which has good output but is harder to find.

These two are the top on my list, from current lenses lineup. But as said I am wary of Tamron's size and Pentax's price & possible issues. In my neck of the woods Tamron can be had for ~ 500-550 EUR new and Pentax for 900+ EUR new, a significant difference.




QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
Leave the DA*60-250 alone unless you're sure about it. Believe it or not, you can get almost as good IQ out of the F70-210/4-5.6 (Takumar or Pentax) for well under $150 (sometimes as low as $60, depending on the version and the seller). Of course this lens has a slower aperture. And it's a bit weak beyond 180mm.

Thanks for the tip, I will probably try to get this first.
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!
body, camera, dslr, focus, head, ii, k100d, k5, k5ii, lens, lenses, light, pentax, people, photography, quality, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K100D Super vs K100D w6wat Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 09-27-2013 06:50 AM
For Sale - Sold: KatzEye™ Focusing Screen for the Pentax® K100D, K100D Super, K110D, K200D, K-r & K-x mycarsoots Sold Items 7 03-23-2013 08:17 AM
Anyone with K100D Super who can guide my blind K100D Super? striker_ Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 11-12-2012 03:28 PM
K100d vs K100d Super - what to do rhonalou Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 07-18-2008 02:33 PM
Pentax K100d or K100D Super, which one? Jimsi777 General Talk 5 10-01-2007 03:32 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 PM. | 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