|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-06-2016, 10:46 PM
|
| |
Inverting a focusing mechanism wouldn't require much effort or an entirely new lens design:
1. Machine the helicoid in reverse.
2. Stamp the focusing guide in reverse.
3. Profit?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-05-2016, 05:24 PM
|
| |
Looks like the 15-30's focusing ring/helical has retained the design of another brand's direction? That would be an annoying ergonomic oversight. :(
|
|
Forum: Pentax Forums Giveaways
01-17-2016, 08:47 AM
|
| |
One piece of advice that goes against the "shoot more" school of thought:
Shoot less... by getting a smaller card. I recently got an old 1GB (for free!) and using RAW format I only get about 35-36 shots (reminds me of my film days!). It forces you to think about all your settings in camera, previsualizing the shot, and questioning whether the shot you're about to take is a great one. Granted, you can delete bad shots (it is digital!) but it really helps encompass a lot of the tips laid out so far. One follow-up tip is to use the digital preview (aka depth of field preview) to see whether you're getting the shot you envisioned without taking the shot itself and seeing it on screen (and on newer cameras can be saved anyway).
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
05-13-2015, 08:47 AM
|
| |
What sort of trades were you interested in?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
04-24-2015, 10:35 AM
|
| |
I had sent Ricoh/Pentax a tweet about how they're implementing this mode, but no answer. Will be interesting to see if they use e-shutter, use full/compensated exposure (like multiple exposure mode), or some other method. I'm wondering, pessimistically, if they'll disable the hotshoe/sync port entirely like they do already for speeds faster than x-sync.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
02-06-2015, 04:01 PM
|
| |
Not sure what all the negative pessimism is for...
Just thought it would extend the life of the existing and recent bodies. Plus it wouldn't be unheard of, as seen in Fuji's firm wares updates. Really, the hardware is there, the software is essentially there (as mentioned about the astro accessory control implemented), so why not?
Here is another link that explains it from a different perspective (see toward the end):Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review: Digital Photography Review
For those who seem confused as to why you might want this, please consider that there might be areas of photography outside your experience. If a sub $1500 camera could do this easily over the $8500 645z, of course it would be difficult to justify. But for some types of shooting where colour accuracy and high resolution would be handy in a workflow, this would be amazing. I'm thinking studio/product/catalogue/interiors type of shooting.
Not all Pentax shooters are landscapers.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
02-05-2015, 11:09 PM
|
| |
With the announcement of the Olympus OM-D E-M5 II and its high res photo mode (40MP from a 16MP sensor), this is obviously possible.
The question is, can this be accomplished with the latest bodies? I have a K5 and K5ii, and would love this as a firmware option if possible. The interface currently is quite a kludge to do this for 8 shots manually. The other added benefit would be avoiding moiré and recording full colour data at each pixel point.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-04-2014, 02:18 PM
|
| |
I'm afraid that, despite the "newer" technology, this lens won't be any better than the 17-70 I assume it is supposed to replace. The weight is about the same (488 vs 485 g) and just one size greater filter diameter (72 vs 67 mm), which leads me to believe that it will have the same type of construction (i.e. plastic barrel).
The MTF doesn't look like the increase in diameter has resulted in sharper corners or lower distortion, maybe sharper/better bokeh, but at the expense of a non-fixed aperture. Of course it's difficult to tell without better samples, but it doesn't seem like an improvement so far on paper. Plus the MTFs posted are duplicates, usually they post two sets based on wide open and stopped down... Is anyone paying attention to these details???
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-04-2014, 02:07 PM
|
| |
I've been wondering this as well, thinking that it would have to have a price reduction at some point, ever since its introduction. Is it actually just poor testing or poor quality? From what I've read and viewed so far, I get the sense that it should be more like a 22-37?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
06-25-2014, 06:33 AM
|
| |
Haven't been on the forums in a while, but noticed this issue from elsewhere so decided to throw my experience in as well...
Had this happen on my K200D, well within the warranty period, at least a couple times. With battery grip I believe, and I had tried multiple battery types at the time (lithium, NiMH, NiZn) so I always thought it was a weird power situation. I eventually stuck with eneloops and it seemed to stop...
I'm guessing this camera would be too "discontinued" at this stage, but I'm glad they're going to address it. I have a K5 and K5ii as well, which haven't had this issue, but hopefully they'll be considered in this update as well.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-04-2013, 08:56 AM
|
| |
The patent describes not a replacement for the ground glass, but a supplement (a thin EL layer). The point is to simplify any live-view/overlay mechanism for the viewfinder, where you'd normally have to switch from the viewfinder to the LCD screen. So it's not necessarily over-engineered or stupid, but simply solving a problem (that is, not take your eye away from the finder).
From the patent in question:
 Quote: ... an optical image of an object formed on the focusing screen and a live digital image of the same object displayed by the EL display can be selectively viewed through the viewfinder. According to this structure... [it] facilitates the image switching operation and prevents the structure of the camera becoming complicated. I can see how this would be a simpler approach to handle overlays and live-view compared to the Sony translucent mirror tech in their recent and current SLT models or the Fuji hybrid viewfinder in the XPro1/X100/X100s models.
If the hump is related to this patent, I can see how this would be a different approach that Pentax seems to be proud of in its cryptic interviews.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-04-2013, 08:43 AM
|
| |
The patent for the image essentially described a unique method to display a live view, where the additional motor and gearing controlled the mirror and an EL display at the focusing screen.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-04-2013, 08:41 AM
|
| |
I think this might be the best explanation for the hump so far.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-05-2013, 07:26 AM
|
| |
Umm, except for the fact that it doesn't do video??? Only mentions jpg file format in the specs. Maybe in future updates, but if it's meant to compete with GoPro type cameras, no video is a non-starter.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
08-27-2013, 12:02 PM
|
| |
I have V5 transceivers as well, and have used them to trigger a remote camera. The problem is that there is definitely a delay to the triggers that doesn't seem consistent. So I haven't been able to reliably sync a flash and a camera beyond 1/180, even though I have had it work on occasion. (i.e. remote flash on a V5, remote camera at e.g. 1/500 connected to a V5, and a third V5 to trigger the shot)
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
08-27-2013, 11:57 AM
|
| |
I've tried something like this with what equipment I have (a bunch of Metz flashes, optical triggers). My flashes have the "servo" slave mode and like @maxfield_photo mentioned, the Metz 58 has a 1/125 t.1 time. A plain optical trigger doesn't work with the following method, due to the pre-flash related to PTTL and HSS. The main camera flash acts as the HSS trigger for the remote via the PTTL pre-flash.
Off camera HSS "overdrive/oversync" method:
- Set HSS capable flash mounted on camera in HSS mode, point flash head at remote flash (i.e. away from subject so it doesn't contribute to exposure)
- This allows camera to go faster than 1/180 sync speed (e.g. 1/250 for sure, 1/500 can work, up to 1/1000 seemed to work too, but this depends on ambient light, aperture, and off-camera flash-to-subject distance). Set camera to shutter speed desired for exposure.
- Set remote flash in manual servo slave mode at full power (1/1). Ensure that the slave sensor can "see" the master on-camera flash.
- Fire away!
The remote flash starts to fire after the first pre-flash sent by the master, and due to the long flash tail, it "covers" the entire exposure duration, since the shutter time is relatively short. I'm not sure where exactly on the tail the shutter opens/closes, but I haven't seen much difference in terms of "hot" areas, although I haven't done any scientific testing. Not straightforward or convenient but it works consistently. The main reason to do this is for the higher flash power of the remote vs. "true" HSS flash pulses that are much weaker output (so it's not for freezing motion).
Hope that makes sense.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-01-2013, 12:07 PM
|
| |
I take issue with the idea that it cost what it did back then ($7000 or probably about $9000 in today's dollars - I'm rounding to the nearest thousand). It was the first freakin' full frame camera! Plus Contax wasn't exactly a mainstream company (and still isn't: look at Zeiss today) so it wasn't geared at the "consumer" or even "prosumer." This was in digital photography's toddler years and there would of course have been an early adopter tax involved, especially with the high end.
A 645D at intro ($10000) would have cost around $8000 back then - clearly not possible, relatively speaking, back then, but I would say that the Contax was equivalently similar (spec and price-wise). The other way of looking at it was that Canon had just introduced the D30 (3 MP APS-C) based on a mid-range body for $3000-ish, or about $4000 today. What could you buy today for $4000? Oh right, a "mid-range" full frame Nikon D800(E) or Canon 5D mk iii (i.e. not a top end D3/D4 or 1-series)...
Canon and Kodak didn't come out with their full frames until a year or two later (depending on announcement/availability dates) and theirs didn't seem to garner the same level of "how much?" questioning (the Canon 1Ds was $8000). Remember that the successive models from Canon (D60, 10D, etc.) were progressively better with similar or cheaper prices, eventually culminating with the first digital Rebel at $1000. Which makes me wonder where Pentax would be today if they had pursued this more intently (well, with a business model more like Canon's, not Contax).
Plus you have to recall that the sensor was actually a re-purposed one for medium format. Not to mention it went down to ISO 25. Instead of looking at the advantages of something with that sensitivity (e.g. no polarizers! killing ambient lighting and strobes for bright conditions wide open! long exposures!), "reviews" seemed to take issue with noise issues at ISO 200/400 (3-4 stops above base, so not essentially different from 800-1600-3200 today), and I'm sure would have been dealt with with NR software by now. Same thing with battery life - for the time, not bad considering it was a monster sensor, probably intended for studio shooting (i.e. AC adapter).
I'm not disagreeing with the general sentiments about the various early cameras, but you have to take things in both historical and product line contexts.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
04-24-2013, 11:39 AM
|
| |
Would be a cool idea, but...
Did you happen to see the date of the post??? :hmm:
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
12-12-2011, 12:20 PM
|
| |
See here:
Re: Russell, do you know if 530superDG....: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
Basically, stick your HSS-capable flash on camera. Set your external Metz 58 or 48 flash for "Slave, servo mode" at full power (this will allow this flash to trigger when it sees the on-camera flash's pre-flash, but not until the main exposure). Shoot at faster than 1/180 sync speed!
I've tried this and verified up to 1/4000 with a K5 and Metz 48 and 58 units. Less than full power doesn't work though, but if you're trying to overpower full sun, you're likely shooting full power anyway and you can just vary the output by distance to subject. Just have to make sure the sensor on the off-camera flash can properly "see" the HSS signal (which can be troublesome with this sort of line-of-sight technique in bright sun, so you may need to shield the sensor; just turning it away from the sun seems to work fine).
Wireless HSS at full power. On a Pentax. Awesome.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-15-2011, 11:33 PM
|
| |
Seems that the cameras (and more mirrorless talk) have taken over the headlines for the past little while, so I thought I'd swing things back to the flash side just to remind folks that there was some talk of improved flashes before photokina, but now nothing...
Whether it be new weather-sealed flashes, improved pttl, greater flash exposure compensation range, or allowing higher than x-sync flash triggering (i.e. just let the damn camera fire the x-contact regardless of the shutter speed!), hopefully some flash-related news will be incorporated in upcoming firmware updates...
As an aside, I did have a brilliant idea that Pentax could freely use (some acknowledgement would be nice though) for their next flash: use the same battery setup as in the K-r to allow rechargeable lithiums as the power source but still have the adapter for AA batteries. This would allow for lower temperature use, matching the K-5 in utility and specifications.
I thought of this because of a recent shoot in December where the temperature was hovering near freezing (5 degrees C and falling quickly as the sun went down) and my flashes were next to useless on rechargeable NiMH or NiZn, and of course I had some alkaline backups but even they were slow. Having the lithium battery and AA options would be sweet for flashes. Wouldn't be much trouble since they've already got it figured out in the K-r right?
Come on Pentax! Be interesting!
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
01-15-2011, 09:19 PM
|
| |
Is the price for all the cartridges?
Would you be willing to ship to Kingston, ON, Canada? (How much would you want for shipping?)
Thanks!
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-03-2010, 10:57 AM
|
| |
Just odd to me that it wouldn't be publicized as such. It's a big deal (to me) to have relatively accurate colour at all viewing angles. Not knowing that has made me hesitate on the purchase. I was hoping that the shatterproof glass from the 645d and the limited edition K7 would have been standard too; any idea if this made it to the K5 as well but not specified as such?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-03-2010, 07:48 AM
|
| |
Nobody? I thought a number of people had seen both in person at any number of recent trade shows???
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-01-2010, 08:05 AM
|
| |
Hello,
Would anyone happen to know (via comparison between the two bodies) whether the K-5 still has an IPS LCD screen? This was one spec that was listed on the K-7 spec sheet, but seemed absent on the K-5 official specs... I am assuming that since most of the bodies are identical, it would be the same, but perhaps they took it out as a cost-cutting measure.
Could someone compare/contrast the two screens please?
Thanks!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-29-2010, 12:36 PM
|
| |
Glad I could explain things... it's harder to explain than to show/do I think.
The 3-d "effect" is not so much an effect but the effective use of lighting (and all its variables) to "shape" your subject. For instance, an off-camera softbox provides a relatively big light source, wrapping its light around your subject (in a portrait for instance) and softening but emphasizing the texture and shape of the subject. The opposite would be straight on-camera flash, a relatively small source of light, in-line with the lens, creating a flat and harsh look so common in "snapshots." The contrast in the photo doesn't necessarily have much to do with the 3-d-ness of the image (although it can). It has more to do with the separation of lit foreground/midground/background.
Lighting is used to shape the subject, whether in photos or videos. Try deconstructing a fashion magazine shot or tv/movie scene and see what/how they achieve what they do. Everything you see is likely to be "artificially" lit - rare to use natural light for anything commercial, even if it looks it. Landscape/wildlife photographers are essentially doing the same thing but trying to find it rather than create it.
Anyway, getting back on topic, I just find it incredibly frustrating that the flash is deactivated by the manufacturer above the sync speed. I don't understand the reasoning for it (those who would be trying it would be in manual mode, not something someone not knowing what they're doing would likely be trying, let alone complaining about). All my previous film bodies and other manufacturers seem to allow it. It just seems like a waste of effort to deactivate this instead of leaving well enough alone. Surely a firmware update could allow a menu option for this.
|
