|
Forum: Pentax Forums Giveaways
09-07-2016, 12:23 PM
|
| |
With a K-50 like that I can finally capture the meaning of life and everything else ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-02-2013, 01:43 PM
|
| |
Now that I've checked the latest rumored roadmap and, if indeed a 20-40mm is the Limited zoom, we may have quite a wide-angle soon!
If that DA Zoom Limited covers 20 to 40, the DA wide-zoom could be something like a 10-30mm. Please be constant-aperture! The normal DA zoom could cover 16 to 85 which is a very nice range for me. I'm sure plenty of people are waiting for the DA Tele Zoom too. Not my cup of tea but it looks like it could 120 to 360 or something similar. Could be a first such tele zoom for Pentax.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-02-2013, 01:35 PM
|
| |
This is a very odd lens, even for Pentax :)
I'm with the skeptics on this one. Unlike most other Limited lenses, this one offers nothing that another lens does not completely cover. When I saw the Limited zoom on the roadmap for the first time and a few months later Sigma's 18-35mm F/1.8 came out I thought Pentax would offer something comparable. The focal-range was shown approximately on the roadmap, so 18-35 or 20-40 was possible. Naturally since most Limited are relatively bright I expected something with F/2 or brighter which would be truly Limited for a zoom. There are way too many zooms at F/2.8+ to deserve the Limited label!
Hopefully the DA Zooms won't disappoint as much. I've been waiting to replace my 12-24mm F/4, hopefully with something even wider but still excellent quality.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-16-2013, 08:20 PM
|
| |
These look super-awesome! I imagine this stole Pentax's thunder as this is what I thought Pentax would do for a full-frame camera: compact mirrorless with built-in EVF and weather-sealed body, using a Sony sensor of-course!
Well, they still can do better if they manage to build one with all that plus Shake-Reduction and make it freezeproof more sturdy by fixing the LCD. Who knows, maybe they can pull off even more and make it waterproof like the Nikon AW1 :D
Now the dilemma for me is weather to get a K-3 or one these Sony ones. I have beautiful Pentax lenses but also a premium collection of Minolta lenses which have not seen much use in since the KM 7D. Only brielfy used them with the Sony SLT-A77. The Pentax handling is absolutely perfect but saving weight and bulk is very tempting, particularly when not doing pro work.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
03-08-2013, 08:18 PM
|
| |
Great to hear of your story and generosity. I too have taken my DA* 16-50mm F/2.8 in very rough conditions at it accounts for 85% of my photography. So much that I travel with two of them. If one fails, I need the other one right away, so I can't just leave it as one plus warranty!
Have fun with the contest!
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-29-2013, 08:44 PM
|
| |
Reader's Digest Photography Manual is classic. It covers all the basics and is old enough that you can read it for free from a library.
Then, I'll second the recommendation for Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. Read it once you get the basics from another book since this
one only covers exposure.
Even more important is a book on composition which I would recommend as The Photographer's Eye by Micheal Freeman. This is the best book on compositon in my opinion. You can read my review of it to know more.
Finally, the one which influenced me the most is National Geographic's Photography Field Guide. Read it several times and this one is about putting photography in practice. If you plan to do travel photography or just general unplanned shooting, this is an excellent book.
Once you get the basics, look for books on photography themes that you like.
Good luck and have fun!
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-17-2013, 01:24 PM
|
| |
Sandisk but only black or red ones. The blue ones are less reliable. Still, they are more reliable than off-brand ones but even in Sandisk there are differences.
Lexar Professionals too are absolutely excellent. Contrarily to the Sandisk ones, I have never seen one fail.
Because of my work, I have had over a hundred cards and really Lexar has always been top, followed by Sandisk and then Kingston. You will notice that the
better ones also come with a lifetime warranty.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-17-2013, 01:19 PM
|
| |
That is a tough choice. I know, because I've had both too and had to decide which one to stick with. I went with the K-5 which I recently upgraded to a K-5 IIs. This is an awesome choice for the type of images that I do because AF matters little for landscapes and architecture. I take my time to frame and so half-a-second more of AF does not matter much.
If AF was important to me, I would go with the D7000, easily. It is much faster, even than the K-5 IIs which is more sensitive but slower. Also, I find the AF speed very consistent on the Nikon. With the K-5 and K-5 IIs, it is fast on one lens, slow another and very slow on yet another. With bright quality lenses on top of that.
Honestly I would not even look at budget. Sure you have to afford it but the only thing that can happen is that you buy something less than idea just to save a few $$$ and then you'll regret it. You're getting into a system of cameras, lenses and maybe flashes, so the choice better be the right one to start with.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-17-2013, 01:09 PM
|
| |
Right, it looks like too many in the 43 to 55 range, I'd keep the two best ones.
Then, I'd get red of the 18-55mm and 18-135mm. I've had them both and really cannot stand seeing photos from those anymore. They look better
compared to other kits lenses but once I started seeing what the primes and DA* can do, I couldn't see those images the same way. Plus, I ended
with a serious case of LBA too!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2013, 12:52 PM
|
| |
- There are several lenses on the K-mount roadmap for '2013 or later'. Can we have more details regarding focal-length and aperture?
- When can we expect a DA* 8-16mm F/4 ? Ultra-wide is really lacking and the DA 12-24 is old and no WR.
- If not, can you at least licence the 11-16mm F/2.8 from Tokina and make a DA* or at least WR version of it?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
07-03-2012, 05:35 PM
|
| |
Unfortunately Pentax was quite vague. On June 27th, they said "Sometimes next month (July) in the US" in one of the comments on the FB page.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-08-2011, 07:20 AM
|
| |
Well, the teaser could be for anything, but to simply keep its market share, Pentax has to updgrade its two DSLR to follow what competitors have done. This means:
- K-5 upgraded with the new Sony 24 MP to match the announced Sony A77/A65.
- K-r upgraded to the Sony 16 MP sensor used in the K-5 to match Nikon's entry D5100 which is already available.
Pentax HAS to do BOTH but they may launch one at a time. As much as I would like the K-5 successor first, they may do tke K-r instead. The cool thing about a 24 MP DSLR is that it could exceed the quality of the A77 which loses 1/3 of incoming light due to its translucent mirror. The performance of should be more similar to that of the NEX-7 but I would except better as a bigger body should handle heat-dissipation better and could include more noise-reduction circuitry.
While they are doing this, Pentax could introduce some other innovations in the mix but given the short cycle they had this time, I would not expect much. The (still pending) acquisition by Ricoh is the wildcard though, so we may be surprised!
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-30-2011, 07:37 PM
|
| |
Really wish Pentax had a wider high-quality ultra-zoom. So far, I'm stuck too with only 12-24mm F/4 :)
I tried several third-party ones starting at 10mm and none of them cut-it, period. The Sigma 8-16mm is gaining a lot of praise and the sharpness I've seen in tests is actually quite good. Vignetting is not... only one review seems to have gotten different results, but everyone else shows over 1.5-2 EV drop-off around 8mm. That is simply unacceptable. Even stopping down to F/8, there is still more than 1 EV, meaning you're going to have to crop your images out of a dark tunnel!
Fisheye I also tried but its not for me. Perspective distortion is one thing but when lines become curves it gives a look that gets tiresome, event though the first few shots are neat.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-29-2011, 05:59 AM
|
| |
The DA-12-24mm F/4 is really awesome and I use it quite a bit.
I have also used the NIkkor 14-24mm F/2.8 on a D3 and got some awesome results. It is true that many people do not know who to use such a wide-angle but that does not mean the lens should not exist. There are even more people who do not know how to use their cameras!
It has to be rectilinear for me (and for my clients), fisheye images do not sell that much (of course, some of anything do). I used a rented fisheye (on Nikon, they do not rent Pentax lenses here) and it just does not give results that I personally like (I know some people love them).
I'd buy the Tokina 11-16mm if it was available for Pentax and considering I paid $1600 for the DA* 60-250mm F/4, I would pay $2000 USD for a DA* 8-16mm F/4. More even it is F/2.8. There you go Pentax, that's how to get another 2K from me! ;)
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-28-2011, 08:47 AM
|
| |
DA* 8-16mm F/4 - Will, if they can make it F/2.8 even better!
It is true that Pentax is lacking on both ends of the range, Quality ultra-wide-angle options are extremely rare and we are being in terms of coverage for other systems.
Even Four-Thirds has a nice 7-14mm F/4 and Nikon full-frame have a 14-24mm F/2.8 lens which gives the angle-of-view.
On APS-C sensors, the best quality ultra-wide is probably the Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 which is not available for Pentax and does not give an as wide angle-of-view. A number of variable-aperture lenses exist from third-parties (10-22, 10-24, 8-16, etc) but they all suffer from terrible image quality.
If the cannot make the 8-16mm, they should at LEAST commision the design of the Tokina 11-16mm, since most times designs are shared the other way around!
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-26-2011, 11:05 AM
|
| |
That depends on your use. I almost never use any lens beyond 55mm (15% or less), so I do not see much lenses that I would buy if there no ultra-wide offering soon. I have to settle for the 12-24mm F/4 on the ultra-wide size but I would like it to be weather-sealed and wider.
On a Nikon full-fame loaner, I shot with a 14-24mm F/2.8 and the perspective to me is awesome while maintaining awesome quality. I heard the Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 is extremely good. For Pentax, I was not able to get decent image quality below 12mm (returned both Sigma and Tamron lenses).
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-22-2011, 08:09 AM
|
| |
It is great to have done such a survey although the multiple choice format limited this to what you find desirable.
I am highly disappointed there were no ultra-wide-angle choices in there, something that Pentax is severely lacking. Any or all of these would be excellent options:
- DA* 8-16mm F/4 - Would be 2K USD for that!
- DA* 11-16mm F/2.8 - This one can even be based on the Tokina since designs are often shared the other way around.
I was glad to see a 24mm F/2 WR which is probably the only proposed one I would buy, OK maybe the 50mm F/1 depending on price. I'd add a 16mm F/2 (either DA* or WR).
No Tilt-Shift! Why? Why? Why? :( These are completely missing from the Pentax line-up.
Well, anything more is better than nothing!
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-13-2011, 11:42 AM
|
| |
Drool ;)
I'm crossing my fingers. Forget about the WR on my previous reply.
Maybe we can make that a DA* :)
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-13-2011, 11:39 AM
|
| |
Yes!!!! Any of those two would do. Variable apertures are no fun... and I certainly feel jealous of those with the wider field of view... but not to the point of ruining my image quality with those (10-xx) from Sigma and Tamron (I tried and returned them). Didn't get my hands on the Sigma 8-16mm though.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-13-2011, 11:26 AM
|
| |
They know this actually. Why else would the 645D be made like that?
That and the second tripod mount for portrait-orientation without an L-bracket.... small details like this are cheap to make but only the most expensive models get them :(
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
02-03-2011, 08:08 AM
|
| |
I'm not sure I saw the real explanation in any answers so far...
Fisheye versus rectilinear (aka non-fish-eye) has to do with the lens construction, not the focal-length.
A fisheye, regardless of focal-length will straight turn lines into curves unless they do not pass with through the center.
The curving effect is inversely proportional to the focal-length, so a 10mm fisheye is noticeably more curved than a 17mm one. They rarely do fisheyes with longer focals because the effect would be very minor. These kinds of things, in photography, tend to work better when done more fully.
A rectilinear lens is designed to render straight lines straight, although you may see some curvature called 'barrel' or 'pincushion' which are actually defects.
A 16mm rectilinear lens when mounted on an 1.5X crop camera gives you a field of view equivalent to 24mm on a 35mm or full-frame camera. This is the beginning of 'ultra-wide'. Images like that have an unnatural perspective but not extremely so. Depending the different depths shown in your image, it may be more or less noticeable.
When you go down from there to 12, 10 and 8, things start to look distorted because of the great discrepancy between the perspective we see with our eyes. Straight lines should remain straight but angles are not preserved.
Hope this clears things up for you!
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
02-03-2011, 07:51 AM
|
| |
Yes! That's important. Breath OUT then shoot, holding your breath is harder to keep still.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
02-02-2011, 10:57 AM
|
| |
My center one is very slightly off center, it only makes a difference for extremely close focusing but it took me a while to figure out that it was not the lens that was having issues.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-10-2011, 01:42 PM
|
| |
Remember 'if you can't beat them join them' :)
If you set the WB to CTE, the camera will try to show you the colors in the scene, not the ones that your brain was trying to see ;) It should emphasize the mood much more then rendering things neutral.
- Itai
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-10-2011, 01:39 PM
|
| |
The 'radar screen' as you call it shows the color space of different color modes. It is there just to give you an impression of how that particular mode affects colors.
The center-point represents grey and the farther the colors reach outwards, the more rich colors.
So, if the middle outline reaches out towards the green point (marked with G), then the color mode while produce more saturated greens. Same for the other colors.
As you change the color modes then you can see the effect of which color will be mostly affected. You choose then which one with your artistic sense. There is no right or wrong answer, if you prefer more subdued colors, use one where the middle outline is closer to the center.
|
