|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-04-2010, 07:19 PM
|
| |
The 2" discrepancies at the lower left and right is due to a slight paper curl on the lower right, however the position of the curl in no way affects the center focus line, which is the point of concern here. From my understanding, this is the vital area - so long as it is square relative to the frame, it shouldn't matter if I even cut off the top and/or bottom of the page, should it?
Nonetheless, let's assume for a moment your assertion is correct and the alignment is off by a hair. There is no way this should result in what appears to be a 1mm-2mm front focus on the right and a 6mm-7mm back focus on the left. That would mean my alignment is off by a total of 7mm-9mm, which would CLEARLY be visible as a slanted center focus bar.
Am I making any sense here or is my understanding of the mechanics involved completely off base?
Believe me, hangu, I would love for the answer to be something as simple as user error...
Please understand I'm not trying to be argumentative to prove I'm right...I'm just trying to satisfy my concerns. I do appreciate your help.
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-04-2010, 06:32 PM
|
| |
Correct...those were my thoughts initially as well, only the camera is NOT slanted.
The "Focus Here" bar is lined up perfectly square relative to the frame (I made sure of this). You can easily overlay any kind of square or grid tool to see for yourself.
Look a little more closely though too...the right side isn't "perfect" either...
Assume then for the moment that it is not an alignment/slanting issue...thoughts then?
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-04-2010, 05:49 PM
|
| |
Hello Everyone,
Backstory: When I first got my K-7 and slapped on the DA* 16-50mm SDM, it was back-focusing a bit, so I adjusted in the menu and all seemed well.
Lately, I've been noticing more and more shots wherein I'm off my intended focus mark by just enough to be noticeable on anything larger than a 5x7 print, and it's really irritating me! Thinking I maybe needed to revisit the back-focus adjustment, I re-ran the testing and found something that looked a bit odd to me...
Below is the best adjustment I could manage:
I'm not going to say just yet what my concern(s) are because I want to see if it's just my paranoia or if any of your keen eyes actually spot something.
Any and all thoughts/comments are welcome and appreciated.
Thanks,
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-16-2009, 12:31 PM
|
| |
It should be noted that the Zeiss Planar 50mm f1.4 used in that review is the older version and not their newest T* version released in (IIRC) 2007.
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-16-2009, 12:18 PM
|
| |
Sorry...computer issues these past few days...
Anyhow, the answers are:
F2.8 Series:
Image #1 - Pentax DA* 16-50mm SDM
Image #2 - Zeiss Planar T* 50mm
Image #3 - Pentax DA* 55mm SDM
F1.4 Series:
Image #1 - Zeiss Planar T* 50mm
Image #2 - Pentax DA* 55mm SDM
Anyone surprised? I know there must be some thoughts out there...let's here 'em.
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-12-2009, 01:43 PM
|
| |
I would have to disagree with this point. The Zeiss Planar T* 50mm has a bokeh that is often compared to that of the Nokton 58mm - a lens very well-known for it's "dreamy/buttery" bokeh. The Zeiss doesn't exhibit the Nokton's level of "dreaminess" in it's bokeh, but is still quite "buttery" and smooth with enough character to distinguish itself. I was initially drawn to this type of bokeh, but felt the Nokton was a little too overkill in this regard, whereas the Zeiss struck a nice balance between Nokton-esque bokeh and just great standard bokeh. This is the reason I chose to go with the Zeiss over the Nokton...
There are many comparison threads in this and other forums on the WWW between these two lenses, and I think I read every single one of them :o
Regardless of planar-type/based designs of Pentax (and other) lenses, I still think there are notable differences between them - I just wouldn't cosinder "very rough bokeh" to be one of them ;)
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-10-2009, 02:20 PM
|
| |
Well..."tomorrow" turned out to be a rather long time, so I apologize for the delay!
I've expanded the comparo a bit to include my latest acquisition: a Pentax 16-50mm SDM! Since this lens isn't as fast as the other two, I did two series of test shots: one with all lenses stopped to f2.8 (the 16-50mm SDM's lowest stop), and the second with just the two f1.4 lenses at f1.4.
All shots were taken within minutes of eachother with the major differences between this series of shots and the first being different (outdoor in the shade) lighting and no rain droplets. All images were cropped ever-so-slightly to match sizing (to actually MAKE you smart-arses guess which is which without the aid of focal length framing give-aways!), with only slight exposure tweaking to match levels; all contrast, brightness, saturation, etc. settings were left untouched.
So...which is which?
F2.8 SERIES:
Image #1
Image #2
Image #3
F1.4 SERIES:
Image #1
Image #2
Let the guessing begin!
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
07-02-2009, 08:13 PM
|
| |
A place called "Galaxy Camera" in Ottawa, ON. claims to have K7's already in stock. They have two listed on ebay right now...this is one of them:
New Pentax K7 K-7 DSLR Camera 14.6 MP/ HD Movie/ 5.2FPS - eBay (item 350219875800 end time Jul-06-09 21:06:33 PDT)
I messaged him and asked if these were awaiting arrival or if they had them in stock right now...he replied saying they were IN STOCK.
On an aside/rant, though, notice the price of the auction already at just shy of US$1200 @ 38-bids and still 4-DAYS TO GO...man...I really hate stupid ebayers. Why on earth would you bid an item up so early in the listing time, let alone bid it up to practically MSRP price THAT YOU CAN ALREADY GET IT AT FROM ANY LARGE RETAILER IN THE USA!?!?!? Stupid, I say....STOOOOOOOPID.
Okay, I'm done :D
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-24-2009, 12:46 AM
|
| |
Yes, but you see...
The "smart" shopper would use this information (ie. website lists as "In Stock" with a clearly advertised price), and try to get it price-matched somewhere else with a better reputation and a price-match policy...
Last I checked, price-matching policies don't usually stipulate that the competing company needs to have a "good reputation" :D
Someone should try this...oh yeah...
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-22-2009, 08:54 PM
|
| |
Sorry for my absence...
jfsavage, I will try to fulfill your request(s) tomorrow!
But with respect to the cropping so both frames looked "equal" - I realized the slightly different FOV's of the lenses were dead giveaways for which was which, but I thought this was acceptable insofar as total resolutions of both images were the same; I wanted to introduce as little "digital corruption" to the images as possible.
In the end, the cropping isn't the focus of this small comparison; it's the different rendering characteristics (in both the details and bokeh) of these lenses that intrigues me.
My own personal take: I LOVE the way the Zeiss handles. It is an MF lens of all-metal construction, and as such the focusing action is just butter smooth and substantial feeling. As good as the DA* 55mm is, it is still a plastic lens and will always feel that way when compared to the Zeiss. Image quality-wise, at first I found myself preferring the Zeiss over the DA*; but as I've played more and more with the DA*, it began to win me over. The Zeiss' bokeh almost has a Nokton 58mm-esque quality to it, though not as (as others have described it) "dreamy". I preferred this look at first, but now find the no-nonsense "clean" bokeh of the DA* more appealing...
So, in the end, I still love both lenses, however I find the DA* consistently mounted to my K10D about 90% of the time when I want a 50mm-range lens.
Now I just have to decide if I'm going to keep the Zeiss...it just feels sooo niiice (the way I'd imagine one of the Pentax Limited lenses would feel, though I haven't had the privilege of handling one personally...yet!)
Anyhow, as I said at the start of this post, I'll try to get the images you requested, but I probably won't be cropping them to match frames. Okay? :)
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-21-2009, 01:09 AM
|
| |
Can you tell which is which without "peeking" at the EXIF?
Both photos shot in RAW @ f2.4 within minutes of each other, and both with no PP other than the "AUTO" adjustments settings applied in ACR (for the sake of level-matching), then reduced in size by 50% and saved as a JPEG in PS CS4. (Originals are available if necessary!)
IMAGE #1
IMAGE #2
Thoughts? Surprise anyone? :D
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-05-2009, 07:45 AM
|
| |
They need:
The Most Interesting Man In The World
www.staythirstymyfriends.com
This guy is awesome. He'd sell K-7's like nobody's business.
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Site Suggestions and Help
06-05-2009, 07:31 AM
|
| |
I'm by no means a web-design guy, but instead of making the switch-over between regular and mobile Java based, couldn't you just insert another page that the "Forum" link from the homepage goes to? And on this simple page, provide two links called "Classic View" and "Mobile View"?
Like I said, I'm no web guy, so I may in fact be grossly over-simplifying the process, but it's a simple and effective solution that gives the User the decision without automation via browser tags.
Anyhow...just a thought. As far as mobile skins go though, I think it looks good; though for the record, I too also prefer the "Classic View" :D
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-04-2009, 05:31 PM
|
| |
BEGIN RANT:
I'm not necessarily the longest-running member here, nor do I have the most posts (:o), but quite frankly, I am getting sick and tired of seeing posts like the above quoted. I have three words for you:
GET OVER YOURSELVES.
Sometimes, the truth hurts. Personally, I agree with everything JCPentax has said. Was he talking to a particular individual? No. He was generalizing his observations of these forums...and guess what? He's not the only one out there that feels this way. Spend some time in "other forums" and read what they have to say about "us" here. It's no secret. Does he/they mean EVERY SINGLE POSTER within this forum? Of course not (especially not those of us with less than 10 bloody posts!). There are a number of, shall we call them, "highly outspoken" members who's words carry far greater weight than, for example, mine would.
And here we have a guy, JCPentax, who OUTSIDE OF HIS JOB-DESCRIPTION and ON HIS OWN SPARE TIME takes it upon himself to be an "inside voice" for all of us here. How do "we" thank him? By calling him rude?? By taking personal offense to commentary that wasn't even directed at any "one" in particular? And then (this one is my favorite), drawing the beyond ridiculous conclusion that "if everyone at Pentax is this rude...", followed by the equally ridiculous insinuated threat of "then I won't buy Pentax...". Seriously...who the heck are you (or I) to feel entitled to having a company kiss (y)our arse(s) just so you can do them the "honour" of purchasing their products??
WOW. Seriously...come off it already. And we wonder how we've earned our illustrious reputation. :hmm:
If you don't like JCPentax or HIS thread, then by all means, don't read it. Exactly what is it you hoped to accomplish by coming in here and posting what you did? Stirring a pot that has long settled is all I see. Good job. And yes, like it or not, it is the posts such as yours that prove and strengthen the impression JCPentax (and others) have of this forum. And please, spare me the "he could be nicer about it" crap. Heck, I could be "nicer" with this post myself (believe me, I'm trying :D), but facts still remain facts. If you find yourself personally "insulted" by commentary and opinions made toward an online community you're a part of, then my friend, there seem to be far greater issues you should be addressing.
Yes, I am a member here. Yes, I do find plenty of useful information here. Yes, I am fully aware of it's pros and cons. Yes, I do intend on contributing much more in the future. And, yes, JCPentax, I very much appreciate your time and contribution to all of us here. Please don't let just the handful of these "holier than thou" personas dictate the level of appreciation myself (and I'm certain many, many others) have for you in this forum. Please keep up the excellent work!
END RANT.
(Sorry JCPentax...I just had to...)
Sincerely,
Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-02-2009, 08:36 AM
|
| |
One quick question to John or anyone else in the know:
Front/Back Focusing Correction:
K10D had none (outside the limited one-setting debug menu).
K20D had support for (I believe) 4 different lenses.
K-7 has....?
My apologies if the answer is already somewhere else...I just couldn't find it. :o
Thanks in advance,
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
05-20-2009, 11:27 AM
|
| |
ORIGINAL
CURRENT
Gotta love this sorta crap!
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Site Suggestions and Help
05-20-2009, 06:04 AM
|
| |
I am well aware of what such costs can run up to (in fact, they are even higher up here in Canada...perhaps because it's colder...), but your own words (conveniently bolded :D ) only highlight my point. I'm not trying to be negative or be a dick, but let's not kid ourselves here. I will also admit that I am not quite sure I catch your drift with your last sentence...care to elaborate?
Once again, I will go on record in saying that I SUPPORT and UNDERSTAND such a (as you called it) "Membership Fee"...all I'm saying is just call it that and ditch the smokescreen effect! You'll only find the supporters (like myself!) will increase!
Am I the only one who feels this way? Or maybe I'm just delusional and in the minority here...if so, feel free to sweep me under the rug :o
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Site Suggestions and Help
05-19-2009, 09:56 PM
|
| |
So who's going to be the first to ask X Man where he's getting the "$100" from?
Wait...I guess that would be me. :D
Anyhow, I'm a long-time lurker and infrequent poster. I'm not going to say whether or not I'm for or against this new $10 donation/FEE, but what I will say is that it REALLY irks me when people don't "call a spade a spade".
I'm willing to bet this $10 was not conceived purely in the spirit in which it is being portrayed (ie. Marketplace "filter" of sorts), but that it is simply a means to generate funds. It seems most of the posters in this thread already sense this as half the posts seem to imply Adam's time investment in this forum as justification for this donation/FEE. I will go on record in saying I see NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS...
However, what I DO have a problem with is the guise in which it is being pitched to us. Do I think these new requirements will have some of the stated influences on the Marketplace? Sure...but it's so easily circumventable and non-punishing that in the end, it won't make much of a difference...
At the end of the proverbial day, my point is to just call it like it is. Time/effort/energy/investments...yes, all VERY valid reasons to expect some form of restitution from the community you've created, sustained, and nurtured. If it was simply announced that a $10 FEE is required for access to the Marketplace because of the time/effort/energy/investments made in assuring it's smooth and safe operation, then I would whole-heartedly forward the funds (even though I have never personally sold anything through the Marketplace). I am also equally certain you would've met ZERO resistance or negativity from genuine "Pentaxian" forum members, regardless of post numbers...
I just need to conclude by saying I mean no disrespect to Adam or any of the other Moderators of this forum. I'm just not a fan of fluff masquerading as a truth/fact, and after many years in the Sales profession, I'm pretty confident I can spot a spin-doctor's pitch when I see one ;)
-Paul
|
|
Forum: Weekly Photo Challenges
03-30-2009, 02:43 PM
|
| |
Zonked-out babies make such good models!
First photo post here ever, so I hope you enjoy (hope I did this right!)
K10D w/Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f1.4 @ ISO 100, f1.4, 1/45 (w/minor tweaking in CS3)
 |
