|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
08-11-2019, 04:19 PM
|
| |
Folks
Since past couple of days first 2-3 pictures from my Pentax ks-2 are black - complete pitch black. Do I have an aperture block failure?
My warranty expires in 3 days. Who do I need to contact the seller or Ricoh directly.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-09-2019, 08:42 PM
|
| |
Thanks a lot. Seems like I was paranoid, although I do remember reading on this and other forums about perils of taking the camera to beach. But it seems like my concerns were misplaced.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-09-2019, 04:48 PM
|
| |
Fellow Pentaxians
I am heading to a nearby beach with family, wondering if I should use my camera at the beach. Will be taking mostly family portraits.
I have ks2 and two weather sealed lenses - the kit lens and 16-85. Other lenses in my kit - 43, 77, 50 1.8, 35 2.4
How bad is beach for the camera - can I get away as long as I use the weather sealed lenses. I am assuming non weather sealed are a complete no. I am thinking of using the kit lens to minimize the regret.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-09-2019, 06:47 PM
|
| |
I had a similar conundrum a few months ago. I had a 77, which I loved but wanted something wider. I also was sceptical of mixed reviews of 43 mm, but took the plunge. And I love my 43mm - it’s my most used lens. I may still like the 77 more, but I shoot more often with my 43 mm.
If bokeh is the only thing you want, then possibly 55 mm might be a better choice. But to me, 43 mm’s true value is in rendering - micro contrast, pixie dust whatever one might call it. I also have more keepers with the 43 mm. In my opinion 77 mm is a bit more temperamental - results can vary from being awesome to nahhh. 43 mm though is a workhorse and more reliable. But this could be my inexperience as well, or a bad lens copy.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-29-2019, 02:51 PM
|
| |
Thanks, I ordered the RF 603. Let's see how it works
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-29-2019, 06:45 AM
|
| |
Thanks, everyone. I have ordered the 43 mm. I am hoping that 7 mm will make a difference -allowing me to take photos without running into the wall and or the dingy corners.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-25-2019, 12:25 PM
|
| |
Thanks. Ks2 has optical capabilities. The challenge is that it lights up the subject with the pop-up flash. Unlike off camera flash which I can bounce, direct pop-up flash creates harsh shadows
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-25-2019, 10:57 AM
|
| |
Thanks, everyone. To answer the question of crop vs. full frame, I use a Ks2.
I spent a couple of days experimenting with the 43 vs. 55 focal lengths on my 16-85. 55 seems too tight for indoor use, especially as my kid grows up and starts sitting upright, it would be impossible to use 55 for a waist up shot. So 43 appears to be a better focal length or maybe even 35 or 31. Thanks bdery for highlighting this.
Now 31 ltd is quite expensive; I am not sure if I have an appetite for it right now. My apartment can be dark - sometimes devoid of natural light so that rules out 35mm macro. So 43 mm with its wide aperture is a reasonable option.
The question now though is - How usable 43 mm is at wide apertures. Does it produces shots of acceptable quality wide open? Also overall is it a worthy upgrade over my nifty fifty - worth paying 4-5 times. With 55 at least I would have upgraded my aperture from 1.8 to 1.4.
Also, I plan to buy a used lens. Surprisingly in the used market, 43 mm and 55 mm are roughly equally priced. This means that 43 mm commands a premium over 55 - may the fear of SDM failure?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-22-2019, 12:54 PM
|
| |
Hello Pentaxians
I am considering to buy a short telephoto prime lens. My primary use will be portraits. I already have a 50 mm 1.8, but I am seriously considering an upgrade.
I started photography around a year ago. I use 16-85 for my landscapes and as a general walkaround/ vacation lens. For portraits, I have 77mm, 35 mm 2.4 and 50 mm 1.8. A large portion of my portraits is of my son, who is 6 months old. 77 mm is my absolute favorite for portraits - I use it every time we are out of the house. But at home, most of my pictures are shot with the 35 mm or 50 mm, since I live in a small apartment. I have used my 35 mm and 50 mm extensively - but I think as a photographer I am growing out of them. I can notice a difference in the quality of pictures shot with the 77 mm vs 50 & 35 mm. My biggest gripe with 35 mm and 50 mm is lack of contrast compared to the 77 mm. So I am thinking of buying a better quality 50 mm lens.
Pros of 55 mm as I understand are nicer bokeh, WR and larger aperture. I don't care about the WR, my use will be mostly inside the house. 43 mm has that unique ltd rendering, compact size and faster focus. I do care about the bokeh but at the same time, I love my 77 rendering - which I hope 43 ltd will also provide. I also compared the sharpness of 55 mm vs 50 mm 1.8 on opticallimits website. It seems that center sharpness of 50 mm at 1.8 is higher than 55 mm at f2 . Same with 43 mm, which has lower res than 50 mm 1.8 at all apertures. How can a more expensive lens have a lower resolution? What am I missing? The slow and inaccurate focus of 55 mm also seems to be a constant critique
As you can see, I need some help to make the decision.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
04-27-2019, 03:00 PM
|
| |
Thanks a lot, everyone for their valuable suggestions.Sorry for the late reply - I got a bit lost with other things.
So I decided to buy the Raynox - 250. I am quite happy with the image quality. But the working distance is a big challenge. I am using it on my nifty fifty. The working distance is so close that it is impossible to use it in the field for live insects. Also due to the working distance, the composition is also a bit challenging. If the flowers are slightly bigger (or smaller for that matter) I can't get it in focus. This is quite limiting in what kind of things I can photograph. Am I missing something? I am assuming tubes in this regards can be helpful as one can use a different combination of tubes.
Few photos with my raynox
|
|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
04-14-2019, 05:57 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
04-14-2019, 05:26 PM
|
| |
I think I have a dead/hot pixel. Could it be dust? If it is indeed dead/hot pixel, what can be done about this? I have a Pentax Ks2, it is still in warranty, shall I send it on for repairs?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
04-08-2019, 06:31 PM
|
| |
Thank you so much, everyone, for the advice
To answer some of the questions, I am trying to keep the purchase/s below $100. I do have a tripod, but don't have a flash. While I understand the 100 mm macro might be the best option, but I currently don't have an appetite for such an investment. I keep kicking myself for the 77 mm - not that it is a bad lens, but I just don't use it often. It has a very specialized use case; I believe 100 mm macro will fall into the same category.
With that - I think my choices are two - Raynox 250 adapter to pair with my 50 mm 1.8 lens or an old manual macro lens. I was able to find 50 mm F4 macro on eBay for $75. Raynox 250 is also in the same ballpark price range. Is there any difference between the two in terms of image quality. Also, can they both be combined to get even higher magnification, Raynox on 50 mm F4?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
04-06-2019, 07:41 PM
|
| |
Dear Pentaxians - Need some advice on a starter kit for Macro photography. I am a hobbyist who is keen to try Macro photography. I don’t own currently a macro lens. I did some research and it seems that Pentax (or any 3rd party) does not make tubes with AF. Which is mostly fine as I anyways find auto focus to be quite unreliable for Macro work. But what I do need is an extension which alllows for aperture adjustment as only one lens in my current kit has an aperture ring - the 77 mm ltd, which I don’t want to use for Macro work. So it seems that I have 3 options:
1. Get a tube which allows for apperature adjustment
2. Get an old manual lens with an aperture ring and a tube
3. Buy an converter for one my lenses (50 mm 1.8) and a matching tube
Can someone please help me understand pros and cons of each and suggest lens/tube for the preferred option.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-13-2019, 06:11 PM
|
| |
Thanks again everyone for their valuable comments - special shout to Des.
Just received my lens, will be trying it over the weekend. Hoping it’s not a bad copy.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-04-2019, 10:57 AM
|
| |
Thanks a lot guys, super helpful comments
I decided to go for the 18-135. I also happened to get my hand on one to take some trial shots. I am no expert, but there is a difference in image quality compared to my primes - which is not a surprise.
But I need a workhorse lens which has a decent focal length range. Purely for practical reasons I can’t always shoot with a prime. Weight and size of lens is a big criteria for me, 18-135 is quite a bit lighter and smaller - a perfect travel lens. Price is also a factor, I got a ‘like new’ 18-135 on amazon for $169. The biggest complaint seems to be softness around corners, which I don’t mind as lot of my shots are portraits. For landscape maybe I will invest in a ultra wide prime - but that decision is at least 6-9 months out. As a beginner, I think I have enough lenses in my kit.
Pictures from Des also helped me make up my mind - wonderful shots. A stupid question - are those shots postprocessed or straight out of camera. How do we evaluate when someone uploads sample shots on this forum, if they are post processed then it could be that lens is crappy but editing skills of the photographer are awesome.
One final question - what is a good working range (FL and apperature) of 18-135. Some of you did comment on the FL range, but I am wondering if there is a sweet spot for apperature also.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-01-2019, 03:13 PM
|
| |
New to photography. Got a KS2 six months ago. I played with the kit lens for four months and then got a couple of prime lenses - 35 and 50 mm. Now that probably wasn’t a smart move as the advice usually for the beginners is to stick to the kit lens till their skills outgrow the lens. I, however, couldn’t go back to the kit lens after using the primes. The IQ is just so much better, even as a beginner I notice the difference without pixel peeping. Having been using only prime lenses for the past two months, I am however running into the limitations of the primes – mainly the flexibility of focal length. So now considering getting a zoom lens. Two contenders are 18-135 and 16-85 lenses.
I have read most of the threads on this topic and the consensus seems to be that 16-85 has better IQ. However, is the difference significant enough? As a beginner will I even notice the difference without pixel peeping. A used 18-135 is one third the price of a 16-85 – so there is a significant premium to pay.
I am still discovering the style of my photography, so not sure if I would prefer the extra zoom of 18-135 or additional width of 16-85. In fact, this is also a motivation for me to get a good zoom lens. If I keep shooting at 35 mm, I would never discover how shooting at wide focal length is like.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-31-2018, 09:05 AM
|
| |
Wow thanks guys for the quick reply.
I should have added more details in my post. I already did change the focus mode to select. It doesn’t work, I am starting to think that something is wrong with my camera. Do I need to return it or is it a software glitch which can be fixed through an update.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-30-2018, 07:06 PM
|
| |
New to ks2. Trying to get the focus select working in live view. According to the manual I should long press the center button and then use the left-right and up-down keys to move focus point. My long press just zooms into the scene. What am I doing wrong - any
help will be much appreciated.
|
