[Andi Lo]

Isn't this entire 3D effect based on DOF.
I mean... from a technical stand-point, its nothing more than a matter of the the right distance, focal range and DOF.

Which I always concluded was entirely lens based to begin with(though you'd still need a camera to do it )

No, it's not just DOF; DOF plays some part but not all of the equation. FA 35... unfortunately isnt 3D at all It's a great lens but that's actually its weakness. At f/2 you get bokeh that looks like it's painted on canvas, color pops out great but it doesnt look 3D. Dont know what the science behind it is...

As far as 3D goes the tak 28 and 35 beats fa 35 hands down.

---

Last edited by Andi Lo; 12-24-2009 at 09:51 AM.

[sajah]

Am I the only one not seeing the pictures?

Probably, because I can see all the pictures.

[cbaytan]

Probably, because I can see all the pictures.

Yeah, now I can see at home.

[davidreilly3207]

Comparing the 'kit' zoom to a prime is unfair to the camera itself, especially wide open. Acquire an equivalent prime lens and I think you will be happier.

[Winnie]

I'm pretty new at this myself, but if it's one thing I have done is take a lot of 'test' pics and read a LOT of reviews.
This is a quote from a review of the Nikon lens you're using.
"It produces finely detailed images at all apertures (although with somewhat low contrast wide open), focuses quickly and accurately, and handles well in a small, light package. In particular, it's much sharper than typical DX standard zooms such as the Nikon AF-S 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 DX VR or Nikon AF-S 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 DX VR. The fast maximum aperture allows pictures to be taken hand-held in low light levels, while maintaining relatively fast shutter speeds to avoid blur from subject motion (a key advantage over image-stabilised, but slow, kit zooms when photographing people without flash indoors).

As you already stated if you want the 3D pop you know what you have to do.
I've already taken some pictures with my kit zoom that have amazed..myself. (ahem) -But at the same time, I wonder if I had a GREAT prime what they 'might' have looked like. The zoom is an all around 'decent' kit lens. It's got a good wide angle range at 18mm and at 55mm it'll do a portrait. It's just to start you off to begin taking some pics.

On an unrelated note I was seriously looking at the D40 before I got my K2000, SO: Image Quality COMPLETELY aside, what do you think of the KX compared to the D40 insofar as using the camera and the quality?

[UnknownVT]

There seems to be a lot of discussion saying it is unfair to compare the Pentax kit zoom lens to a Nikon prime - although this may be true in theory - one should not get away from the fact the OP does have a legitimate complaint - as his posted photos show - there is a visible softness to the images.

It's a great pity that the EXIF information was not attached or posted with the images for us to ascertain if there were any possible problems -
that information is in every photo that then K-x produces -
it is hardly any trouble to post them or make sure they are still attached to the image - this sort of information is so useful when problems are encountered - and without it most of us are merely guessing.

It is also worthwhile noting that the Pentax 18-55 kit lens happens to be pretty respectable - I would be equally disappointed if any of my shots with the Kx and that kit lens gave results as posted -

PopPhoto has reviewed the Samsung clone of this 18-55 and this is their SQF chart:



EDIT to ADD -
I found that PopPhoto has actually tested the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 prime -


comparing both SQF at 35mm - the Pentax 18-55 kit is not shabby at all.
----------------------------------------------------

in other words the Pentax 18-55 may in theory be "inferior" to a Nikon prime lens - but it's hardly a "dog" -
please let's get things in perspective.

The OP's posted images are disappointing -
but I think I'll reserve my comments until we can see the all important EXIF data......

[keyser]

I think the wave of opinion is not that the 18-55mm lens is in any way shabby, but that his copy is having front focussing issues. In which case an exchange is probably the best way forward.

[UnknownVT]

I think the wave of opinion is not that the 18-55mm lens is in any way shabby

There are several posts that seem to think that the Pentax 18-55 kit zoom would NOT be a match to the Nikon prime -
or am I just not reading this right?

Seriously, you're comparing a kit zoom lens worth $50 to a prime lens.

For the love of god.

Any prime will have significantly better IQ unless you get a relatively expensive zoom, especially when the zoom is wide open. A $50 M50/1.7 for the K-x will knock the socks off the kit lens.

- The fact remains, a prime stopped down versus a kit lens at or near wide open is just plain wrong

You shouldn't be comparing prime lenses with the kit lens.

I think the biggest problem is that the kit lens is pretty soft compared to most prime lenses.

Comparing the 'kit' zoom to a prime is unfair to the camera itself, especially wide open. Acquire an equivalent prime lens and I think you will be happier.

My post was merely to show that the Pentax 18-55 kit zoom was quite respectable and it was still a reasonably worthwhile "comparison" for the OP to show he had a problem.

Again as I said I reserve my comments to what the problem might be
until I can see the EXIF data....... surely that cannot be too hard to post?

[cbaytan]

18-55mm is no way a bad lens, I've used it extensively, but I think he needs to try the body with another lens in a camera shop or something, maybe it's the body having the problem. I think he should even try another kit lens.

[ytterbium]

When talking about subjective quality i must say that i was always impressed by the nikon shots. They have some sort of color rendering that makes them have unique clarity look.
As if they had HDR style boosted micro contrast.

I find that pentax Portrait colour scheme makes for a similar effect.

[lochest]

As soon as i saw the pictures,first thing that popped up in my mind was that the focus is definitely out.I'd say either the lens,or the body needs to be re-calibrated.If you can,just try it with another lens,then according to the results,you can take it to be repaired in Warranty.

[dragonfly]

As soon as i saw the pictures,first thing that popped up in my mind was that the focus is definitely out.I'd say either the lens,or the body needs to be re-calibrated.If you can,just try it with another lens,then according to the results,you can take it to be repaired in Warranty.

Coming from someone with so much knowledge about device calibration^

[Adam]

I'm going to barge in on this thread and say that if you had this, your K-x would satisfy

[SteveM]

I'm going to barge in on this thread and say that if you had this, your K-x would satisfy :tongue:

Yes....you should get this lens.....or wait until Adam raffles it off on the forum in January. You could always pick up a real lens....a Takumar

[monochrome]

I'm going to barge in on this thread and say that if you had this, your K-x would satisfy :tongue:

Yes....you should get this lens.....or wait until Adam raffles it off on the forum in January. You could always pick up a real lens....a Takumar

That lens/AFTC/body rig is the prize for the 1,000,000th Post, right Adam?