|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-30-2008, 05:57 PM
|
| |
i have a k200d, so hopefully my experience should be relevent for the OP.
the included energizer lithiums lasted me 1100 shots with flash used around 20% of the time and i probably used the playback mode for around 150-200 pics.
i'm now using sanyo eneloops. with a set of energizer 2500mah as spares. (not used yet)
i dont get as many shots from the eneloops (around 700 in similar circumstances as the lithiums) but my annoyance is that the flash takes a lot longer to recharge. approx 3-4 seconds after a single discharge. whereas with the lithiums, i could get around 3 flashes in 1(ish) second intervals before i'd have to wait for 2-3 seconds for a 'recharge'.
do they make a rechargeable lithium? or soon?
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-30-2008, 12:01 AM
|
| |
nice aussie car in the first pics! i used to build those. (holden monaro in aus)
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-28-2008, 04:36 PM
|
| |
hi,
i bought this camera myself last week, for a similar amount. great camera!
I bought the jb hifi pack for 697, which comes with the kit lens(18-55 II), a panasonic 20mb/s 4bg card and a small, but good bag.
then i bought the sigma lenses you see in my profile (17-70 and apo 70-300) for $528(299 and 229) from Ted's and diamonds cameras, respectively. last, i sold the small bag and kit lense on ebay and got $135 for it.
in essence, the camera cost around 510, the card 50, and my new lenses 528. a good bag will set you back anywhere from 40(i got a 'premier' brand bag, which is a slightly smaller version of the lowepro 180), upto around 100 and beyond. the bag was from teds also. in this i carry the camera with the 17-70 on it, the second lense, and in the front pocket i have spare batteries, the left over lense cap and a few other tidbits.
i think a good package for $1130!
for some reason the actual camera stores were cheaper than DCW for the lenses!
If 1000 is your absolute limit, the kit lense is still very good, and perhaps you have no need for a second higher zoom lense, or you want a prime(in essence a fixed focal length, but great image quality-generally)lense.
the lenses i bought seemed to get good reviews and seemed to be the best 'bang for buck'. so far i am more than pleased with the results i've gotten att all focal lengths and several aperature settings.
i hope this helps.
if you have any other q's, please ask.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-27-2008, 06:25 AM
|
| |
I bought this lens as it was a good price and seemed to get decent reviews. well, first, so far its been great. a bit of vignetting (sp?) but easily removed, without image sacrifice when RAW. second, it's range of 2.8-4.5 is for the most part better than i'd read.
i get 2.8 up to 24mm, and still have 4.0 at 67mm!
obviously, it's a bit sharper at 5.6-8, but good numbers in any case. especially for AUD $299!
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-25-2008, 06:16 AM
|
| |
thans everyone for the compliments. Any tips for similar, future pics? From my own reading, it seems i could reposition the pink flower more to the left.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-24-2008, 09:37 PM
|
| |
thanks. i already have a good knowledge of CA (and now PF ;) ) I remember reading a few reviews where the sigma and tamron were compared. they are basically the same lense, if i recall, but the tamron did have more CA.
still, great pics.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-24-2008, 08:47 PM
|
| |
i have no weight in opinion, but i really like those pics. the 3rd and 1st are my favs. sorry for the probably silly question, but what does PF mean? I understand most photography terms and acronyms, but i cant thiunk what it stands for.
by the way is that just a 1:2 macro tmaron, or something more 'high end' i have a sigma 70-300 which does 1:2 in macro mode, and i havent been able to get a shot this in focus, whilst so 'zoomed in'.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-24-2008, 06:01 PM
|
| |
thankyou. It's good to learn what styles/techniques are able to be used.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-24-2008, 05:29 PM
|
| |
We took some pics yesterday, and these are the ones that I liked the most.
Hope you enjoy them too. Comments and Critism is welcome and helpful.
Thanks.
I like this one. Sarah actually took it. Something about the backround i think.
This one's not really in focus, but Sarah said something about it looked nice.
 |
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-23-2008, 07:40 PM
|
| |
I just bought a K200d with Sigma 17-70 and 70-300 APO. These are some pics I took on my first evening out with it. Taken last night at Hallett Cove in SA. The first 2 are with the 70-300, the 4th was the 17-70, and I'm not sure now on the 3rd. It was taken at 70mm, so could have been either.
C&C is welcome. I want to learn!
Thanks.
 |
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
10-22-2008, 08:57 PM
|
| |
Hi everyone. I just bought a k200d with sigma 17-70 and 70-300 APO lenses. So far I love this little camera and both lenses seem really good too. I've been lucky enough to have a good amount of time with a nikon d90(for value for money comparison), and optional features asides, this takes excellent pics and has a great usable feature-set. noise is the only thing i can notice relative to the nikon.
The sigma lenses are certainly a step above the twin vr lenses the nikon had. excellent value for money here. I'm new to dslr's, although I had an FZ30 for just over a year and learnt enough to get me by with that.
Hopefully I'll have some pics to post soon. seems a great site.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
10-22-2008, 08:51 PM
|
| |
i have a k200d. i'm liking it alot, although it does have a lot more noise than a d90 i've been able to play with. i use adobe cs3 at the moment for my raw conversions and editing. is this the best program to use for noise reduction, or is the software on the cd better? is there a better prgram (cheap/free now, i ve spent all my money!) and lastly, and i think unlikely, do i just use the in camera settings?
thanks.
|
