[Lowell Goudge]

I hear what you're saying. I have several of these vintage flashes. One I have especially liked is the TTL flash capable AF 280T with tilt/swivel and a special downward tilt setting for closeups- all this while being exceptionally compact for its power output capabilities. However, I do have several more recent P-TTL flash units, which I tend to use when I need a flash, thinking there might be a better working matchup with my more current cameras.

But I do wonder what would happen if I put the AF 280T on say my K-5 IIs or KP and set the flash to one of its two Auto modes? The auto modes, as I recall, do not use any type of TTL, but instead use the flash unit's own automatic metering via a sensor located in the front output lens of the unit. I found in old film cameras not having any TTL, the flash's own system works quite well. Maybe this is a workaround for getting good auto flash output metering results without engaging P-TTL.

For lenses in a semi wide to portrait 24-85mm for example, auto mode is fine, but for wild life especially, shooting 300-500 mm focal lengths, you run the risk of burning out the subject isolated against a distant background, because the sensor is seeing a much wider field of view than the lens

---------- Post added 04-17-21 at 08:30 AM ----------

Is there ever a thread that has more than just a couple of replies that does not wander around a bit or even go way off topic at times?

I think Lowell raised one feature that would be nice - and when I started with Pentax P-TTL drove me mad so I stopped using it - but I don't think the discussion is limited to flashes but rather things we'd love to see in a Pentax camera.

It really did start about the flash capability, and especially about the woes of P-TTL for wildlife, but I don’t mind if it wanders a little.

My gripe is that save the DA 560, and the 150-450, there are not a lot of wild life options, which can combine to use flash, flash is an important part of wildlife , especially birds, and generally can be useful for small birds inside the min focus distance of the DA560.

I have an excellent sigma APO 70-200/2.8 with 1.4 and 2x TCs, and also a K300/4 and 1.7x AF adaptor. Both of these worked great with my *istD and AF500FTZ but every flagship body since has denied me the Susie of these lenses with flash because the bodies don’t allow you to input the TC so as the body can make a correction for flash, or for the K300 use TTL.

There are a lot of Pentax shooters that have left because the support for wildlife shooters has left them wanting, the ones who stayed are handicapped,

There are many ways to crack the nut, TTL is one, aperture connection, de crippled Kmount is a second, or at least accept inputs for a TC to correct aperture and FL for flash and SR use is a third.

I would take any one of them,

[beholder3]

TTL is obsolete and a useless gimmick which nobody statistically significant needs. Bravo to Pentax for getting rid of it.

Basically Pentax needs to shut down obsolete tech compatibilities faster than they currently do. The cheapos still cling to super old stuff way too long and do not buy modern equipment.

[texandrews]

All I want is a 100mp 645z II - in a DSLR format of course - with a larger viewfinder than the present 645z - no on sensor PDAF either.

And newer MF zooms to compliment the 28-45 like a 45-100 and 100-250 zoom all weather sealed with internal zooming (don't like extending barrel zoom lenses).

OK, to play along, and tag along on your post, easy ones first:

• upgraded 45 prime, DFA WR
• shift or T/S lens based on the 6x7 45 prime
• other prime lenses upgraded to DFA WR status over time
• new ImageTransmitter software (Image Transmitter 3) that works with Lightroom, or some kind of better tethering arrangement
• new wired and wireless remotes with better functionality
• joint venture with an external monitor maker to provide one that is 645Z centric
• firmware goodies.

Then, for the harder ones, involving a new body, same config and layout as the old one for the most part, although a joystick would be cool to move focus points:

• K1 type rear screen, better resolution
• K3III upgrades to OVF
• K3III iso and processing upgrades
• better implemented focus peaking, with user selectable color
• wider set of focus points
• IBIS
• P/S and composition shift
• 100-ish mp
• HSS out of the box
• higher sync speed
• built in radio trigger would be amazing
• 4K video that is decent
• focus stacking automation
• distance readout, embedded in metadata
• larger buffer
• faster write speeds
• upgraded usb

That's off the top of my head at the moment

[mtkeller]

Basically Pentax needs to shut down obsolete tech compatibilities faster than they currently do. The cheapos still cling to super old stuff way too long and do not buy modern equipment.

Careful…the “Mirrorless or bust!” squad is going to show up and use this to hate on DSLRs.

[ThorSanchez]

TTL is obsolete and a useless gimmick which nobody statistically significant needs. Bravo to Pentax for getting rid of it.

Basically Pentax needs to shut down obsolete tech compatibilities faster than they currently do. The cheapos still cling to super old stuff way too long and do not buy modern equipment.

No, no, Pentax is going up-market and catering to the old-tech crowd. So, un-crippled K-mount DSLR cameras with TTL metering and no screen on the back for $15,000. They're sure to sell tens of them, but huge profits on each one.

[Lowell Goudge]

TTL is obsolete and a useless gimmick which nobody statistically significant needs. Bravo to Pentax for getting rid of it.

Basically Pentax needs to shut down obsolete tech compatibilities faster than they currently do. The cheapos still cling to super old stuff way too long and do not buy modern equipment.

So you are saying I should spend $2K plus on a DFA150-450 just because Pentax doesn’t want to spend a few dollars literally adding a feature to allow me to use my sigma 1.4x and 2x TCs with my 70-200/2.8.

What saved Pentax in the DSLR market was back compatibility. Your attitude is like canon, who have changed slr lens mounts 3 times, with no back compatibility and have now discontinued all DSLR support and development.

Pentax made a choice, to stay in DSLRs they either need to continue to support their installed base or they will die any way.

Your suggestion will only kill them off earlier

And by the way, if P-TTL was the be all and end all why would I be asking for TTL, because for wild life it works better, plain and simple


Aside from the above, why wouldn’t they look to cater to people who remain with them, for example, since they don’t make a single full frame TC, why not allow for use of a TC in their software we are not denying them of any sales, since they don’t sell what we are using any way. If they came out with a 1.4 x and 2 x TC with aperture and focal length correction built in, I would likely buy one, along with a ton of other users who also use third party lenses. The reason we all have these lenses in the first place is Pentax never offered them at the time.

[jon.partsch]

Right now I only want two things form Ricoh for the Pentax brand - things that should be very easy to provide, but seem to have been completely ignored. Please!

• 1. enable hybrid AF in live view for *stills* photography on the K-70 and any other camera that has PDAF sensors on the imaging chip.
• 2. user-selectable focus peaking colors (at least red and yellow in addition to the default white)

Please!!!

[beholder3]

So you are saying I should spend $2K plus on a DFA150-450

If you want a proper tele zoom, yes sure.

just because Pentax doesn’t want to spend a few dollars literally adding a feature to allow me to use my sigma 1.4x and 2x TCs with my 70-200/2.8.

I do not want them to spend a single cent on such things as well and probably lots of other customers as well.

What saved Pentax in the DSLR market was back compatibility.

It is open to argument if it has "saved" or killed them.
And obsolete 3rd party lens support has never been "back compatibility". The lens manufacturer has to make sure there is compatibility.

Your attitude is like canon, who have changed slr lens mounts 3 times, with no back compatibility and have now discontinued all DSLR support and development.

Well its is consumer electronics. It is not a "investment". It works until it stops working and then you have to buy new. Where does Canon stand and where does Pentax stand?

Pentax made a choice, to stay in DSLRs they either need to continue to support their installed base or they will die any way.

People living in the past and being too cheap to buy modern OEM equipment kill the brand. The sooner they leave for good the better. What can we do to encourage them to leave asap?

And by the way, if P-TTL was the be all and end all why would I be asking for TTL, because for wild life it works better, plain and simple

It is working worse. You have your opinion and every else has too. We can agree to disagree.

side from the above, why wouldn’t they look to cater to people who ... also use third party lenses. The reason we all have these lenses in the first place is Pentax never offered them at the time.

Then address your wishes to the maker of your lenses and TCs. Oh, they do not give a ... ? Hm.

Again: I ask Pentax to not waste a second or cent on any of this.

[bdery]

Sigh. No matter how much Ricoh improves AF performance, there will be those reviewers who will find a way to criticize it. They'll say something like it isn't as reliable as they expect it to be, or it doesn't "feel as precise".

That said, I am looking forward to the AF improvements, especially in AF tracking, in the K-3 iii.

I also use a Sony mirrorless these days. Accuracy of the AF is not better than Pentax's.

But the speed, especially in tracking, and the reliability of the tracking, are in another league completely.

It makes you lazy, actually, but also lets you focus on composition. Is it always needed? No. But I do understand that when reviewing cameras (which all deliver great images) reviewers do have to concentrate on the differences. And AF is measurable, while ergonomics, viewfinder brightness, and the "pleasure" aspect (as Ricoh puts it) is hard to quantify.

[MSL]

@beholder3 - I'm not sure why photography has to be a passion only for the rich. I'm thrilled Pentax has kept so much backward compatibility. I find the flexibility to buy cheap glass and to try to hone my skills with it as rewarding as using a Limited lens that works well without thinking. Combined with the ruggedness of the bodies it is an excellent option for those who want this an enjoyable hobby, but at a level beyond what you could do with a simple point and shoot.

[Lowell Goudge]

@beholder3 - I'm not sure why photography has to be a passion only for the rich. I'm thrilled Pentax has kept so much backward compatibility. I find the flexibility to buy cheap glass and to try to hone my skills with it as rewarding as using a Limited lens that works well without thinking. Combined with the ruggedness of the bodies it is an excellent option for those who want this an enjoyable hobby, but at a level beyond what you could do with a simple point and shoot.

+1

I don’t think these days there are many people who are willing to discard all their equipment every 2 years to ride the leading edge of technology, although I have seen more than a few threads that essentially start,” sold my Nikon kit, before that I had Stoney and cannon, what can Pentax give me now?”

You see them every once and a while and I just shake my head and wonder

---------- Post added 04-19-21 at 07:26 PM ----------

I also use a Sony mirrorless these days. Accuracy of the AF is not better than Pentax's.

But the speed, especially in tracking, and the reliability of the tracking, are in another league completely.

It makes you lazy, actually, but also lets you focus on composition. Is it always needed? No. But I do understand that when reviewing cameras (which all deliver great images) reviewers do have to concentrate on the differences. And AF is measurable, while ergonomics, viewfinder brightness, and the "pleasure" aspect (as Ricoh puts it) is hard to quantify.

Ergonomics is a quantifiable process. It is studied based upon the depth of menus for the most commonly used functions

[MSL]

+1I don’t think these days there are many people who are willing to discard all their equipment every 2 years to ride the leading edge of technology, although I have seen more than a few threads that essentially start,” sold my Nikon kit, before that I had Stoney and cannon, what can Pentax give me now?”You see them every once and a while and I just shake my head and wonder

For me it really was a different story. I hadn't used my SLR for years and I only had two lenses for it. When I found out the fancier one wasn't going to be compatible with a modern DSLR I had to start over. I tried a friend's Canon and it felt wrong in my hands. The Sony alphas were still transitioning out of their Minolta origins and as a small brand didn't appeal to me. I wanted to look at Nikon, but this was when the factory in the Philippines had been closed because of a typhoon. I tried Pentax, and the K5 felt right. The 18-55 kit lens did not. The 18-55 WR felt a lot better, especially the quick shift, although I doubt I've used that feature much.

If memory serves I then poked around online and it doesn't take more than one search on Pentax to find the forums. And one of the things I started to learn about here was the ability to use old glass. While I've been fortunate to acquire some good (F50/1.7) and very good Limited lenses (only very recently) the only lens I bought new was the upgrade to the kit lens. Early forays into macro were done with extension tubes, an m42 macro lens etc. My fastest glass are either m42 or Pentax M lenses. But I wouldn't have been able to try all these things if I had to buy everything new, or if the pool of second hand options was limited. I was also very fortunate that I started buying 8+ years ago, when you could still get a Helios 44 or Super-Tak 135/3.5 complete with hood and case for less than the Canadian shipping costs.


So I see a lot of value in the way Pentax has structured its products and maintained the backward compatibility. Of course this won't be important to every user. And even with Pentax's approach there are limits - I can't use a KAF4 mount lens on my K5 for example. But for a small brand that isn't trying to compete with the biggest players, I see it as a good way to grown and maintain a loyal user base. Where I see people leaving Pentax it is main because they want something small/lighter - i.e. they are changing systems and not just brands and not just because they are fed up with not having certain bells and whistles.

[bdery]

Ergonomics is a quantifiable process. It is studied based upon the depth of menus for the most commonly used functions

I understand what you mean, but what I meant is the feel in the hand, the logic of how functions are accessed, how it balances in the hand, etc. It's much more than how many levels there are in the menu.

[Lowell Goudge]

I understand what you mean, but what I meant is the feel in the hand, the logic of how functions are accessed, how it balances in the hand, etc. It's much more than how many levels there are in the menu.

true but also outside of the balance and grip, the logical placement of dials, buttons etc, is also part of the type of physical analysis of location and movement as a function of frequency of access. in a similar method to menu evaluation

[beholder3]

@beholder3 - I'm not sure why photography has to be a passion only for the rich.

It should not.

But:
It is a small brand fighting for survival. I want it to survive. If your "un-rich" means not buying current original Pentax stuff, which makes the brand continue, then: I want this type of un-customer go and Pentax please ignore these types.

And:
ILC photography always was a luxury hobby. We are not talking about food and drink.