|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-31-2018, 08:04 AM
|
| |
I agree with the last few posters. I've owned one copy of the Pentax 16-50 and two copies of the Tamron 17-50. The Pentax is the better lens, its sharp in the center of the frame at f/2.8 and the 16mm is quite useful. It also has great contrast, rendering and it focuses well.
The Pentax review is correct, its not worth the premium but given the sale price of it used it is the best value of the three lenses. Of course if you want one walkaround lens then the 16-85 is a good option but its a pretty different type of lens; in that boat the Sigma 17-70 should be considered as well.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
04-17-2018, 08:23 AM
|
| |
It's fine wide open but compare the two at F8 or F/9. Everything gets better stopped down but the 55 - 300 really improves more than most.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
04-17-2018, 05:50 AM
|
| |
I'm posting to note that I purchased the 16-50 without SDM about a year ago and love it. This is a great deal. In comparison, I have also used:
Sigma 24-60 f/2.8
Pentax 24-90 f3.2/4.5
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Pentax 18-55
The 16-50 is on another level optically. The lens's reputation is hurt but the SDM problems and initial reliability reports but is now an incredible value. I suggest anyone in the market looking to improve their walkaround lens, purchases it.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
04-03-2017, 09:39 AM
|
| |
I would have composed so that the sun is not behind the tree. Rather, the tree leads the eye to the sun as it is rising.
It's a good first try, and the exposure is pretty good.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
04-03-2017, 09:35 AM
|
| |
I like the first version a lot. The second is not good; the color is very distracting from the subject, which is the baby.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-30-2017, 05:29 AM
|
| |
In photoshop, go into "Curves" and increase the exposure for the dark areas/shadows. You don't want to increase the exposure for everything because you will blow the highlights.
In my opinion, the first edit in the thread is best, but not quite enough.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
03-23-2017, 11:36 AM
|
| |
In crop mode, at f/8 the 55-300 is pretty great by almost all standards. Some people are happy wide open, but an equivalent 450mm f/11 lens for $199 (price used) is pretty great!
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
02-22-2017, 09:23 AM
|
| |
These are really strong, I personally like 1, 2, 3 and 7. On 8, maybe some minor cropping? particularly of the bottom. If I were to be very critical, 4 and 6 are photos that are seen fairly often and the top third of the first photo is not particularly exciting. Overall, they are a great set though.
If I were looking to save money, I wouldn't print #6 and #8 as currently shown.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
12-20-2016, 07:04 AM
|
| |
I like this one and the one with the water the best! A nice set of photos.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-20-2016, 06:59 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
12-06-2016, 10:44 AM
|
| |
I love the colour photos. The second and fourth in particular. Especially the second one... Nice job!
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
12-06-2016, 10:36 AM
|
| |
This photo should have been metered off the background that is blown out (white or grey). It's white/grey because the camera tried to give the foreground (lawn) enough light to show color. And not be just black. This is due to to the contrast previous posters have referenced between the lawn and background.
Set your camera to a center point so that it meters off of the one point you focus it on. In this case, that would be the area that is white. Then you can always move it to recompose without metering/focusing.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
09-12-2016, 06:48 AM
|
| |
It's a good shot! But please fix the horizon if you can!
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
07-13-2016, 05:18 AM
|
| |
I like the last photo the best but it can't win the way it is. The blacks need to be way darker; as many posters have commented.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
06-03-2016, 04:12 AM
|
| |
Here's my crop! I may be biased, as a surfer I prefer the wave to be focused/situated in certain ways.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
06-02-2016, 10:57 AM
|
| |
The pictures are all good but if I was going to be critical:
The first picture would be better with 10% of the left side cropped and maybe 3-5% off the bottom. This would emphasize the breaking portion of the wave and the background. IMO, the second section of wave on the very left edge takes away somewhat.
The second photo is composed well but would be better, in my opinion, with one large wave or no waves at all. The sky could use some cropping as well; I'd think about going toward the top of the clouds.
The third is pretty good; the horizon could be slightly leveled. It goes down from left to right, very slightly.
The first photo is my favorite.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-29-2016, 05:12 AM
|
| |
I think you're making the right call. The ONLY thing to consider is if you want something a shade longer, say 17-70 2.8/4. But to me, from your description the 17-50 sounds like a best bet. There's a reason that almost all events are shot on f/2.8 zooms and not primes. It's helpful to have the ability to zoom in and out from your location.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
04-20-2016, 11:37 AM
|
| |
If you're really using the 150-500 with a 2x converter, the Pentax K3 is a no-brainer versus the K1. Not even close.
I didn't realize that from earlier posts.
---------- Post added 04-20-2016 at 03:30 PM ----------
I agree, yes on the K3 and no on the K5. I also agree that AF and high ISO performance should be better on the K1. Shouldn't they be? It's three times the price. On reach, yes, if he crops the K1, he will get the reach but at the expense of performance and at a bigger cost. As he mentions above, if he's using a 2x tele on his 150-500, he's better with the K3 and to keep the extra money in the bank, in my opinion.
I prefer to move in with my zoom as I compose the final shot. Even on APS, you can track with the lens zoomed out and then move in as necessary. To each his own, I also see your point.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
04-19-2016, 05:29 AM
|
| |
With a Pentax K3 you will have increased image quality at higher ISOs compared to your K20. The K3 has good image quality up to ISO 1600 (probably similar to the K20s ISO 400) and it is decent up to 6400. The full frame may be better but it is also significantly more money. The K20 is only good up to ISO 400 and I wouldn't use it past ISO 800.
As others have alluded to, the lenses you use will depend on the format. For most of us, APS is great for sports because we don't have a long lens. I shoot surfing with the 55-300 telephoto lens; my typical settings are ISO 400-800 with F/8-11 yielding shutter speeds around 1/2000. This gear wouldn't be quite long enough on a full frame camera. I'd need your Sigma 50-500 on a full frame camera for shooting surfing to get the reach I currently have on APS.
If you use your Sigma near 500mm often, the K3 is likely better to keep the same reach.
In my opinion, APS is better than full frame for sports because the lenses I would need to shoot sports on full frame are out of my budget. On the flip side, full frame is more economical for portraits/events because of the lenses available. Compare the Pentax 28-105 vs the 17-70s for example. Cheaper and with wider aperture.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-29-2016, 07:59 AM
|
| |
To be the contrarian, focal lengths are almost meaningless while the field of view (FOV) is incredibly important for our photos.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-22-2016, 04:41 AM
|
| |
For me, the arm being in better focus than the face is distracting. Other than that, great shot though. The framing is good and the photo is interesting. I just think it'd be better with greater depth of field or focused slightly farther back to his face.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-15-2016, 10:30 AM
|
| |
I agree, best old lens I've ever seen.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-25-2016, 08:39 AM
|
| |
It's pretty sharp, especially f/5.6 and up. And it gives really good colors. I like it but you are correct that it would probably test more like that 18-135 than the 16-85
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-17-2016, 12:24 PM
|
| |
With this being basically a portrait of a horse, I'd have gone wide open with the lens to blur the background more.
I like the photo though. In general, F6.3-F11 are going to be your sharpest and you can choose whether you want more blur f6 or less, f11. F8 is typically accepted as the best sharpness. In terms of ISO/aperature/shutter I think your settings are fine, I'd have just liked to see it's look wide open.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
01-17-2016, 08:28 AM
|
| |
| |
