|
Forum: Photographic Technique
02-25-2009, 11:44 AM
|
| |
Hi -
I'm a lawyer in New York. I don't specialize in the law about photography, but as to one's right to photograph people in public, the law is absolutely clear: You have the right to photograph anyone you'd like so long as you are in a public place. Period. End of discussion.
And, frankly, I don't understand why this is even a bit difficult to understand. If you are in a PUBLIC area, you do not have an expectation of privacy as to your appearance. People are allowed to look at you, gawk at you, point at you, talk to you. People are allowed to photograph you as well. That's what it means to be in a PUBLIC location.
And isteve is right about the subsequent use of the photograph. You're allowed to do just about anything you'd like with a photograph of someone you took in a public place, except to use their likeness to advertise for a particular product or other similar commercial purposes. You are free to publish it on the internet, in books, etc.
Of course, this doesn't mean that as a matter of courtesy or cultural understanding, one shouldn't be concerned about the feelings of folks one is taking pictures of. That's a very complicated question, but it is not a legal one.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-27-2009, 04:25 PM
|
| |
Since Pentax doesn't make a camera in the "category," to borrow Ned's word, of "full-frame DSLR," should he next brag about what a great camera his new (your choice) Nikon D700 or Canon 5D or Sony A900 is?
How would the Ned defenders here feel about that? If you think that's OK, good for you -- consistency is to be lauded. But if you don't, can you tell me what the difference is? After all, Pentax really doesn't have a camera in that "category," right? The K20d is nice and all, but it's not a full-frame.
Sure, such praise by the Prez of Pentax USA ends up suggesting, if only by implication, that Pentax's own DSLRs aren't really up to snuff. But, hey, we're talking different "categories," right?
And, to emphasize, the issue is not whether the Dlux 4 is a good camera, and it is also not whether Ned has a right to use whatever camera he chooses to. Let's assume it is, and he does. The question of whether Ned's recent posts represent poor judgment remains.
yclee2cents.blogspot.com
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-24-2008, 10:33 AM
|
| |
Hi,
I have the Sigma 24mm f/1.8, which is I believe the same size as the 28mm, as well as the Pentax FA35. And I've read that the Sigma 24 and the 28 are similar in other ways as well, but I can't say from first hand experience. So this is only sort of relevant to your question.
I think the FA35 is a terrific lens, world class. I think the same of the Sigma 24. No complaints whatsoever re image quality, rendering, etc.
However, I don't use the 24 nearly as much as the 35, simply because the Sigma 24 is a big, clumsy hunk of glass. It's at least 2x the size of the 35, maybe 2.5 or 3x. Obviously, this sort of thing matters to some people but not others.
Also, I find the Sigma's build quality unsatisfying. For some reason, the plastick-y FA35 feels more solidly built to me. (BTW - I also have the Sigma 18-50 macro f/2.8, like you, and the Sigma 24 doesn't feel as solid as the 18-50. But I agree with you that the 18-50 is just 'pretty good,' not stellar. Very useful, nonetheless, and 'good enough' for most occasions).
Good luck.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-10-2008, 09:11 AM
|
| |
The obvious answer would be to try the newer version of the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 (w/the 'macro' designation). I bought one -- after having read numerous reviews saying that the newer version is much better than the old one -- and it's a perfectly good zoom -- good IQ from f/2.8 at nearly all focal lengths (a bit weak at 50, I'd say) & quite well-built (and it doesn't have that awkward "two-tier" zoom construction that the DA* 16-50 has).
And why do you say "hope"? I have not heard nearly as many complaints about back- or fron-focusing or decentering w/this lens as I have with the DA* 16-50 or the new Tammy 17-50. There will, of course, be some lemons. But it's all relative ...
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-17-2008, 11:01 AM
|
| |
Hello --
You are probably right, and perhaps I should've saved for (and waited for ...) the FA*24 before buying the Sigma 24mm f/1.8. I also do not like the size (and "feel" / build quality) of the Sigma.
For my intended purpose of using the 24 for low-light indoor pictures, however, I have really no complaints about the Sigma re image quality. I find that it's acceptably sharp at f/1.7 (as registered on my K10d), and I love its close-focus ability.
Here is an example at f/1.7:
And here is one at f/3.5:
All in all, I'd say that apart from its bulkiness, I don't really have any complaints. I find the bokeh perfectly good, and haven't experienced any flare issues (but I usually avoid shooting in a way that would create such issues, so I don't dispute your findings on this point).
In any event, undoubtedly, the FA* is a fine lens, so congrats!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-11-2008, 10:46 AM
|
| |
Hi --
You have to include, w/the camera, a description of what you believe is wrong with it. I doubt that Pentax'll just do a check of everything else if you don't mention it in your note. So, to ensure that Pentax check the other things, you can also mention that you've occasionally had problems with, e.g., the auto-focus or whatever else.
But, yes, Pentax will do the firmware update for you, without you requesting it. And they will also do a thorough cleaning. For instance, they cleaned my previously dirty viewfinder screen quite well.
And the process was a bit faster than I thought it'd be. I sent my K10d to Pentax USA in Colorado (because it occasionally would only take photos with a deep purple tinge) and received it back within 3 weeks. So far so good.
Good luck.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-25-2008, 04:58 AM
|
| |
Yes, true enough. We're all different, and maybe Hin is like you in this regard.
I'm speaking merely from my experience, both re lenses and re other things. For the past 8 or so years, I've been an avid collector of mid-20th-century design objects -- furniture, clocks, lamps, ceramics, etc. And what I eventually learned, after acquiring hundreds & hundreds of "bargains" from E-Bay and elsewhere, was that if I had to do it all over again, I should've skipped the cheapies and saved up for the big-ticket items (for the most part -- I DID really get a few cheapie gems on Ebay, back before everyone discovered the appeal of the same objects). And truth be told, most of the few objects that I still truly treasure are the ones that I paid a bundle for. As for most of the cheapo stuff, I'd be happy to get rid of it all even at 1/5 of the price I originally paid for them.
For me, the collector's adage -- "Buy Fewer but Buy Better" -- rings true.
And I think that for me, the same holds re lenses. When I first got into photography, I quickly bought about 7 or 8 cool old lenses that seemed cheap at the time. But now I don't use them at all .... and if I added up the cost of all those 'cheap' lenses, I'd be easily half-way to the FA31 Ltd (the one FA Ltd I'm missing). (And, yes, I know I can re-flog them, but I find the selling side of eBay to be a big pain-in-the-axx).
But, again, we're all different. I realized quickly that with my crappy eyesight and my particular 'way' of doing my photography, e.g., manual focus lenses just weren't going to do for me. Others obviously don't feel the same way and take terrific photos with old manual lenses.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-25-2008, 03:39 AM
|
| |
Hey Hin --
Why buy the manual focus Tokina 28-70 f/2.8-4 when you just bought the auto focus Tamron 28-75 f/2.8? Speaking from personal experience, a "cheap" $100 lens becomes a really, really expensive $100 paperweight when you have no use for it.
BTW - have you tried adding up the cost of all those $30 and $50 and $90 "cheapo" lenses you've acquired? My guess is that you'd have at least a 43mm Limited in your hands by now (maybe even a 77mm Ltd!) if you just saved for the better stuff .... (Again speaking from unhappy personal experience ....)
Anyway, nice pictures and always good to hear froom you.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-23-2008, 04:50 PM
|
| |
Chris -
Seriously, Pentax should throw a few of the new K20s your way for that write-up.
It sounds like Pentax has, once again, come up with some terrific features for practicing photographers. I had no intention of getting one until I read about these "details" (as always, the devil is in the details!); very impressive (and useful) improvements ....
Let's hope the sensor lives up to your words!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-17-2008, 03:34 AM
|
| |
Hello --
From what I have read, most people who have the grip love it.
However, I bought one and within 30 minutes of putting it on the camera, I put it in the box and returned it. I felt that the grip made the camera too heavy and too large -- certainly not worth the benefit of an extra battery. And I didn't like the feel of the grip, either -- it seemedmore cheaply made than the rest of the camera.
That's simply my personal experience. The large majority of people, as I said, seem to love the grip. I think there's only one way to tell -- try it and see how it feels to you.
Sorry if not more helpful!
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-04-2008, 12:29 PM
|
| |
Hi
A few weeks ago, I bought a 72mm Hoya Pro 1 Digital filter on eBay, from a Hong Kong-based seller, for about $70 or $80 -- well below the $150 or $170 price at B&H or other similar U.S. retailers. I can't recall the name of the seller, but it was a good & easy transaction.
So, as long as the seller's feedback checks out, I would go ahead and buy it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-19-2007, 10:39 AM
|
| |
Here's my tiny bit of experience with this lens, which on paper seems the ideal lens.
I bought a used one off Amazon recently, and returned it for a refund after a few days' use. The auto-focus was just totally off -- the principal problem was back-focusing, but sometimes it would front focus as well. Completely unusable. (I have two other Sigmas, and this is the only time I've encountered a problem with one).
Even apart from that problem, I found that the lens was just OK. Yes, it's quite sharp even at f/1.4 in the center. But there was just something 'missing' about the rendering. I can't describe it other than as 'bland' -- the images just didn't do anything for me (even when in perfect focus). And the images taken by this lens that I've seen posted on various forums confirm this, at least for me.
Like another poster above, I also have the Sigma 24mm f/1.8 (which, unlike the 30mm, is a full-frame lens and thus somewhat larger). Now, the 24mm lens is quite nice -- very sharp, extremely close focus abilities, and nice rendering and color.
I have heard similarly nice things about the Sigma 28mm f/1.8, which is in the same 'family' as the Sigma 24mm, so that would be my suggestion if you are looking for something around that focal length. Pity Pentax 28mm autofocus primes are so hard to find ....
Good luck!
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-16-2007, 06:45 AM
|
| |
Hi --
Well, I can't tell from the two photos you've posted whether there is a serious back- or front- focus issue. But I'll take your word for it that (1) you know what you're doing; (2) that you've done real-life tests & not just angled-ruler-tests (and under various lighting conditions); and (3) this problem seriously affects your real-life ability to use the lens. Based on those assumptions, my advice would be either to return the lens, or to see if there's a warranty from Tamron that you can somehow avail yourself of and get Tamron to fix it.
Now, I just read that you bought this off E-bay. I don't know what that means precisely -- whether you bought it new from a genuine store, or used from an individual. If the latter, I would say that wasn't the best idea. This lens -- which I have -- has quite a reputation for quality-control issues. But if you got a good one, it would be worth its weight in gold. Thus, I decided that the only way I'd buy one is if I could actually try it out first on my camera (or, if I couldn't do that, to buy it from some place with a solid reputation & easy return policy).
Good luck!
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
12-11-2007, 04:46 AM
|
| |
Hi --
Good choices! I also narrowed it down to these two and then went to B & H in person to check them out. And the difference was quite enormous -- the 055 was much larger & heavier compared to the 190. Since I preferred a lighter tripod -- I live in NYC and don't have a car, so if I do lug a tripod around, it's just me carrying it -- I got the 190 (but with the 486RC2 ballhead rather than the 484). Total package was around $200.
I don't think you can go wrong with either. Both are beautifully made (in Italy), exceptionally functional (the horizontal feature is very cool for macro stuff, and the tripod gets really, really low as well), and inspires confidence in use (they are extremely sturdy & everything 'fits' precisely -- I have zero worries about my $1000+ camera and lens when mounted on this tripod & ballhead). One of the first things I read when I started in photography was, "Buy the best tripod you can afford." And I now understand that to be true -- it's not a good thing to skimp on.
As to which of the two, I think that's just a personal choice about weight and capacity (the 055 bears more weight and also goes quite a bit taller, if I recall). I don't have any big ol' lenses, and wanted a tripod that I can occasionally carry around without breaking my back , so I went for the ligher one. But I can very well see choosing the other one if my needs were different.
Good luck --
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-30-2007, 04:34 PM
|
| |
Hi Hin --
How do you remove the modified lens from the body? Just simple "un-screwing"? Or are you able to do it the same way as with any K-mount lens (i.e., pressing the lens-release button, and then turning lens counter-clockwise)? If the former, I wonder what keeps the lens on the body, since that locking lever is gone.
I'm sure I'm just missing something.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-28-2007, 05:10 AM
|
| |
Hi -- Yes, B & H recently renovated (within the 5 weeks, I believe) and now has a huge 2d floor for the SLR stuff. (I'm not sure what'll happen to the old SLR area downstairs in the back -- currently it's walled off). And, yes, finally there's a full Pentax "stand" where anyone can just pick up the K10 and K100 and try how they feel in the hand.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-26-2007, 11:52 AM
|
| |
I bought a K100d in March, and then "upgraded" to the K10d last month. The following are some of the key advantages to the K10, based solely on my subjective use:
1. Much easier to access various controls. I shoot principally in Manual mode, so the 2 wheels speed things up considerably. Also much easier access to metering modes.
2. Much better White Balance adjustments -- much easier to use, much finer adjustments.
2A. Fine-tune adjustment of ISO speed.
3. Weather sealing. Not that weather ever damaged the K100, but with the weather getting rougher now in northern climes, I feel much more comfortable with my K10 around my neck.
4. Battery lasts a LOT longer. Maybe my AA rechargeables in the K100 weren't the best, but the K10 sure seems to last a long longer.
5. Viewfinder is a good deal larger / brighter.
6. Cropping is much easier due to larger file size / greater pixel count. Or so I think.
7. The customizable "USER" mode -- I've found this to be useful at times, and I don't think the K100 has it.
8. Playback function (for reviewing images ('chimping')) seems to move faster (deleting images, e.g., seems quicker), and is also more "detailed" -- e.g., you can see not just a single histogram, but the Red, Blue, and Green histograms; also, you can "zoom" up to 20X (rather than the K100's 12X) to see whether an image is in focus).
***
Those are the principal advantages I've found. Though I've read that there's a difference, I have NOT found that autofocus is faster, or that the Shake Reduction is more effective, on the K10. But that's me. (And as for the "dust reduction" function, well, I'm skeptical about its usefulness generally).
The one distinct disadvantage to the K10 is, as many have already mentioned, is the noise at high ISOs. I'm by no means a pixel peeper, and I generally couldn't care less about noise. But I find that often, even 800 ISO on the K10 produces too much noise. K100's noise seems much better.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-16-2007, 09:43 AM
|
| |
I have two non-SMC screw mounts: a Super Takumar 105 f/2.8 and a Super Takumar 135 f/2.5. Both are very fine lenses. I have not noticed any real difference between these two lenses and the many SMC lenses I have (though not screw mounts -- M, A, and FA series).
My guess is that while the SMC coating matters in some circumstances, it doesn't matter in most.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-15-2007, 05:42 PM
|
| |
Sigma lenses can be a bit hit-and-miss -- but any more than other brands? That I'm not so sure about. I've read plenty of quality control type complaints about Pentax and Tamron as well. If possible, it's probably better to try out any lens on your camera before you buy it. Anyway, if it makes you feel better, my guess is that the vast majority of lenses, of all brands, function as intended.
For what it's worth, I have the Sigma 24 and the new 18-50 f/2.8. Both work just fine.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-15-2007, 08:06 AM
|
| |
I don't do measure-bating, so here's just one person's subjective opinion. I own the Tamron, and the following Pentax primes -- FA35, FA50, FA77, and D-FA100 macro. The Tamron is a great lens -- good build quality and excellent image quality at all apertures and all focal lengths. But it doesn't quite measure up to the Pentax primes in terms of image quality. Almost but not quite.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-14-2007, 01:52 PM
|
| |
Sounds like an over-sized flange problem. My guess is that it's a Kiron-made Vivitar -- i.e., serial number begins with "22"?
There've been some posts here and at dpreview about how to fix this problem. Apparently an electric saw of some kind is required, which is beyond me. But if you know how to use such tools, it is supposedly an easy fix.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-13-2007, 05:42 PM
|
| |
I think PDL's basically right on this: A photographer's LEGAL rights in a public place are pretty expansive. As long as the image is not to be used for commercial purposes, or misused / mislabeled to defame, a photographer can take a picture of just about anything and everything s/he sees while out in public. And your face when out in public is fair game for being captured by any and all cameras, whether used by me, the New York City Police Department, or Macy's. That's the law in the US, at least (and, yes, many of us have mixed feelings about our country's future).
That a photographer has expansive legal rights does not, of course, mean that a photographer should use those rights "unethically" or in a manner undesired by the potential subject. One may have the legal right to take anyone else's picture on the street, but one should not exericse that right if the subject objects. That's a rule that, I think, many (maybe most) photographers observe.
I take pictures all over the city. Some of those include people. And sometimes I ask before I take their picture, sometimes I don't. It all depends. My only rule is the above -- no picture if the person objects.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-12-2007, 06:35 AM
|
| |
Here's my 2 cents on this. Take it for what it's worth.
First, if you really think that your Sigma is already producing images that are "perfect", that's great. The principal goal in our photography should be to create images that please ourselves. And if you already have equipment that you believe is capable of that, stop shopping and continuing shooting!
That having been said, however, I believe that getting the FA50 as a second lens (after the obligatory kit lens or another consumer-grade equivalent) is the right way to go. Because you should immediately notice after using it at, say, f/3.5 or so, that, yes, it IS better -- a LOT better -- than the kit lens at equivalent focal lengths / apertures -- in sharpeness, color, and overall rendition. And you should then being able to judge what your camera (and you) are capable of doing when equipped with an excellent lens, and then you'll be able to determine whether this additional excellence is worth it to you (despite the extra cost and (perhaps) lack of 'convenience' given lack of zoom ability).
Some people may recognize the additional degree of 'excellence', but choose to disregard it for cost or convenience or other reasons. Others won't. It all depends on the individual photographer's eye, preferences (regarding which qualities to accept in a lens / tool, and which to do without), and subject matter. But the key is that you can't really make this judgment for yourself until you've seen the difference with your own eyes.
(Also, on re-reading your post, I think that you are dismissing too quickly the additional advantages of a wide aperture lens, in terms of the additional kind of images you can create / capture. It's not just about low-light ability).
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-03-2007, 06:04 AM
|
| |
I don't think this is right (I've never noticed anything abou the LCD or VF display). The meter operating time controls how long a particular exposure is "locked" once you press the "AE/L" button (on the K100d) or the "green dot" button (on the K10d). I've set mine to the max -- 30 seconds -- because of the way I usually work. E.g., I usually use Manual exposure mode, and spot meter as well. When I spot meter at the point in the frame that I want to use to set the exposure, I lock that particular exposure (by pressing either the AE/L or green button), which is then set for a particular period of time (either 3, 10, or 30 seconds) regardless of where I then move the frame. Thus, I've chosen the 30 second option because it allows me to recompose and think about the picture -- at the precise exposure I want -- before pressing the shutter.
At least I think that's what it does. But who knows -- maybe I'm confusing two different things.
As to Will's 2 other questions:
2. Why one would not use the shutter buttom to set the AF is beyond me as well.
3. I don't link the AF point with the AE point, again because of my particular working method. I use selective focus points (as you asked about in another thread), and I use spot metering. But these aren't usually at the same spots -- i.e., where I choose to spot meter in the frame is often not where I'd like the focus to be. So, I de-link the points.
As for whether this features is applicable when using center-weighted metering, well, I'm not sure about that.
BTW -- it's funny that so many of us, even very experienced users, don't understand some of these basic features of the camera. Perhaps Pentax should have someone rewrite that very thick, but really quite unhelpful, user's manual ...
Hope I'm not adding to the confusion ...
Zenfolio | Yuanchung Lee |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-24-2007, 06:48 AM
|
| |
That's an important omission from the article. Thank you.
I thought the fire explained why Pentax delayed the announcement of the new DSLR (as discussed in another thread) from this October to next January.
|
