Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-05-2007, 03:50 PM   #16
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
WOW



!

03-05-2007, 07:36 PM   #17
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 296
QuoteOriginally posted by amcinroy Quote
Thanks for posting the info Ben,

I will keep my fingers crossed on a firmware fix rather than a chip fix.

In the meantime, I was out using this lens at f8 at the weekend and wow, it's sharp. I will certainly be keeping it.



Andy
To H**l with the lens problem... this is a gorgeous image!
Print it Big!

Last edited by Rolly; 03-05-2007 at 07:38 PM. Reason: addendum
03-05-2007, 07:51 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 313
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
They offered to set up one of my bodies to work in conjunction with the lens, which I refused. I do not wish to take up one body exclusively for that lens. I am waiting on a firmware fix or a chip set change for the lens.

Ben
When you vocally refused, and mentioned the words "firmware fix", what was their exact reaction? They WILL solve it at all costs, and there are planned firmware updates?

Larry
03-05-2007, 07:51 PM   #19
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
Cant they recalibrate the lens?

QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
Just got the response from Pentax via their head office in Germany. They confirmed that there is a back focussing problem with the 21mm Limited exclusively. They offered to set up one of my bodies to work in conjunction with the lens, which I refused. I do not wish to take up one body exclusively for that lens. I am waiting on a firmware fix or a chip set change for the lens. I will use it in manual focus only. They are sending me back the two bodies and the two lenses i.e. the 21 and the 16-45 which didn't have a problem and focussed perfectly on the "0" calibration point. I will wait for the 16-50 f2.8 which I should have in ten days to use in lieu of the 21mm Limited. If it is anything like the Canon 17-40L lens which I used on 80 percent of my magazine work, I will probably do the same with it.

Ben
Would seem more to the point!!

I too am waiting for the 16-50 F2.8. If the Tokina is anything to go by its very sharp and has little distortion - just hope they reduce the flare issue.
I am also lusting for the 50-135. With these two, just about any studio work is possible - not to mention everything else.
Some zooms are IMO good enough to compete with primes especially stopped down a bit.

03-05-2007, 08:49 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by mutley Quote
When you vocally refused, and mentioned the words "firmware fix", what was their exact reaction? They WILL solve it at all costs, and there are planned firmware updates?

Larry
I always wonder why people are hoping firmware (software actually) could resolve some possibly hardware issue!(?)
03-05-2007, 09:55 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 630
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
I always wonder why people are hoping firmware (software actually) could resolve some possibly hardware issue!(?)
Software can compensate such issues. If the built-in firmware can adjust the FF/BF for the camera, why not query the lens serial number and adjust the FF/BF individually based on each individual lens? Store the adjustments in the ROM?
03-06-2007, 02:10 AM   #22
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
Zooms

QuoteOriginally posted by *isteve Quote
Would seem more to the point!!

I too am waiting for the 16-50 F2.8. If the Tokina is anything to go by its very sharp and has little distortion - just hope they reduce the flare issue.
I am also lusting for the 50-135. With these two, just about any studio work is possible - not to mention everything else.
Some zooms are IMO good enough to compete with primes especially stopped down a bit.
Exactly my feeling..
03-06-2007, 02:45 AM   #23
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gloucester UK
Posts: 441
QuoteOriginally posted by d.bradley Quote
Software can compensate such issues. If the built-in firmware can adjust the FF/BF for the camera, why not query the lens serial number and adjust the FF/BF individually based on each individual lens? Store the adjustments in the ROM?
I very much doubt if the serial number is recorded, but it could identify the lens model (Pentax lenses only) and make the neccessary (minor) adjustments. This is what the C***n 1D mkIII does.

IMO this would be a killer feature and elevate the K10D to true "pro" status, in the eyes of reviewers especially. I think this feature will be incorporated as standard in the near future in cameras aimed at the pro-am market.


Last edited by Richard Day; 03-06-2007 at 02:50 AM. Reason: Addendum
03-06-2007, 01:24 PM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Switzerland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,294
I just reviewed my DA21 photos to check for any FF/BF problem.

f/8.0


f/8.0


f/6.7


Did I get a good copy, would the problem not be visible in these shots anyway, or should I have my eyes checked?
03-06-2007, 01:39 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Elmira, On, Canada
Posts: 445
Tcom, those look great to me. I too must need my eyes checked.

If the problem is due to production variation, I can't see how they would fix it in firmware, unless they were to allow the user to calibrate the lens themselves.
03-06-2007, 01:39 PM   #26
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
I'll Check

QuoteOriginally posted by tcom Quote
I just reviewed my DA21 photos to check for any FF/BF problem.

f/8.0


f/8.0


f/6.7


Did I get a good copy, would the problem not be visible in these shots anyway, or should I have my eyes checked?
Just send it to me, so I can make sure that your copy is really functioning well and don't worry if when I send it back to you that the serial number is not the same. That is just a formality...
03-06-2007, 01:53 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Switzerland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,294
lol, benjikan.

I have to add that these photos where taken on the K100D, did not test the lens extensively on the K10D so far.
03-06-2007, 01:56 PM   #28
Veteran Member
Alvin's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,530
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
Just send it to me, so I can make sure that your copy is really functioning well and don't worry if when I send it back to you that the serial number is not the same. That is just a formality...
If you send it to me for testing, I may not send it back because I would need to do some extensive long-term testing.
03-06-2007, 06:54 PM   #29
Veteran Member
Wethphotography's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Washington, D.C., USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 417
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
Just got the response from Pentax via their head office in Germany. They confirmed that there is a back focussing problem with the 21mm Limited exclusively. They offered to set up one of my bodies to work in conjunction with the lens, which I refused. I do not wish to take up one body exclusively for that lens. I am waiting on a firmware fix or a chip set change for the lens. I will use it in manual focus only. They are sending me back the two bodies and the two lenses i.e. the 21 and the 16-45 which didn't have a problem and focussed perfectly on the "0" calibration point. I will wait for the 16-50 f2.8 which I should have in ten days to use in lieu of the 21mm Limited. If it is anything like the Canon 17-40L lens which I used on 80 percent of my magazine work, I will probably do the same with it.

Ben
This is a fascinating thread. But I am still a little confused. Is the back focussing problem exclusive to the 21mm on the K10d or on any pentax dslr? Thanks for continuing to share your experiences.
03-06-2007, 07:34 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by Wethphotography Quote
This is a fascinating thread. But I am still a little confused. Is the back focussing problem exclusive to the 21mm on the K10d or on any pentax dslr? Thanks for continuing to share your experiences.
Both, I think. See:-

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: AF Accuracy's Dependency on Lenses and Yellow Light

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Focus Calibrations for (Pentax) (D)SLR Bodies and Lenses
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!
21mm, bodies, camera, dslr, focus, lens, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: DA 21mm limited, DA 40mm limited, DA* 16-50mm, DA* 50-135mm kphelan Sold Items 13 05-24-2011 02:47 PM
Can a manual-focus lens have back focus problems? PocketPixels Pentax DSLR Discussion 33 02-13-2011 05:37 AM
Focus barrel of my 21mm Limited is not smooth Bdman Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 1 01-05-2011 11:51 AM
Trying to understand front focus/back focus thing 41ants Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 16 08-31-2010 08:42 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:21 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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