|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-08-2018, 03:18 AM
|
| |
Thanks again everyone. The collective knowledge of the forum members is an amazing resource.
You've all convinced me the K-1 (or K-1ii) lives up to the hype. Additionally, Sigma's SG service center just confirmed they'll update the mount on 150-500 at no cost. It's not the fastest lens, but my copy is very sharp (sharper and faster autofocus than my DA* 50-135) and should have no problems with the ISO's available on the K-1. The stars are aligned. And worst comes to worst, it can always be sent back for a Kp.
@ ffking, grispie - Interesting that you both would use the long lens on the smaller format and the wider lens on the FF body.
@ savoche - thanks for the thoughtful and thorough response. Get up early is a must! I've been looking through safari photos on flickr and see that most of the shot I like are around 175mm (ASP-C. I can't tell if they're cropped. I don't plan on getting the DFA 28-105, in favor of using primes. The dust issue is causing me to second-guess this.
@ Tatouzou - So much good information and even your daughter's shots through "a cheap all plastic lens" looked amazing. I'm trying my best not to buy additional lenses. I've got the DA* 16-50 and 50-135's, as well as primes up through 100mm. If I go for the K-1 (which is looking more likely), I'll keep either: 1) the big sigma (weighs a ton) on the K-1 and the 16-50 on the k-50, assuming animals are far away; or 2) switch the K-1 to a 40 or 100 if the animals are close.
@ zahnski - I appreciate the user report. Tick another vote for "buffer issue" is no issue. The 15-30 is outside of this year's budget plan, lol. The relative size, build-quality, glass-viewfinder, IBS are the very thoughtful features that have kept me shooting Pentax. It will definitely take some time to learn this new camera.
@ Zivelot, Ron Boggs - You're the two I've been looking for: the rare, elusive K-1 JPEG shooters! You've both put the K-1 over the line and into B+H's cash register. @ Ron Boggs, the Sigma 150-500 is a full frame lens so no need to go shopping again. There was an issue with the way the original mount was shaped, causing it to scratch the K-1's body, but Sigma offers to update this at no-cost (pretty good service IMO). I'm completely a hobbiest shooter; no editors to please. It will take some time to get to know the camera and its functions and I'm going to look pretty ridiculous chasing stray cats around the neighborhood with the massive Sigma.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-07-2018, 01:05 AM
|
| |
@Sandy Hancock,
Some great shots there. I may ask you to do my processing :P
No doubt the whole Pentax range is more than "sufficient". I'm not too worried about range with the massive sigma. I noticed only one of your brother's shots were at full 300mm zoom.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-06-2018, 10:58 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the thoughtful and very quick replies, so far.
@jatrax, the point-by-point is really helpful. Especially your experience with buffer, shutter-shake, auto-focus, pixel-shift and GPS. I'll keep searching for the elusive JPEG shooter.
@tduell, PePe, mikesbike - I'll also bring the K-50 as a second cam and have quite lenses to choose from in the 135mm and shorter range.
@Asleyfox,
We'll be in northern Tanzania in a private vehicle. Most of our time will be in-vehicle (Serengeti), with a walk or 2 where available (Ngorongoro Crater).
I'll probably pack a bit less glass than your list but also plan to bring a few zooms and a couple of wider primes. I'll probably bring a tripod for low light landscapes and a beanbag for shooting the heavy zooms out of the open roof. If I can't reach it with the 500, I'll accept that it just wasn't meant to be photographed.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-06-2018, 08:17 PM
|
| |
Hi all,
There are lots of great posts here on K-1 vs K-3, K-3 vs Kp and best gear for safari. I'd appreciated hearing thoughts from forum members that might be more specific and tie all of these ideas together.
For background, I'll be going on safari with my wife this June. I already own quite a bit of Pentax gear including a K-50 and a very sharp copy of the Sigma 150-500. I'm a hobby-shooter and most enjoy shooting 6x6 B+W film, with wide-angle primes. I love the 'hi-def' look (sharpness and separation) characteristic of larger formats.
I don't plan on taking any film gear with me on this trip due to weight and since I'm planning on buying a second Pentax digital body, it might be an opportunity to upgrade to full-frame. I've gone so far as to pre-order the K-1ii, but am having second thoughts.
Some key considerations/what I'm thinking:
- Buffer: The K-1's buffer is notoriously small. Shooting in crop mode is probably defeating the purpose of spending the extra $1K for FF. I'm usually very deliberate with my shooting (no burst mode on my Bronica), but can't say what might happen when I see a leopard feeding in my viewfinder. How are most people working around this?
- OoC JPEG: Blasphemy I know, but computers are my least favorite part of photography (I have to use one for 12 hours/day at work) and shooting JPEG would also help with the buffering issue. Are most users happy with the JPEG's that come out-of-camera? I don't see a lot of discussion on this specific topic and I haven't noticed a way to filter online shots by OoC vs RAW. The K-1ii press release mentions they've done some adjustments on the colors. What do forum members think?
- Shutter Shake (Morror Slap?): Lots of forum talk on this, however Pentax says the K-1 is more balanced than the K-3. Given the wide range of ISO options, I should have no problem keeping the shutter at 1/1000 at f8 on a sunny day.
- Pixel-shift: I'll be shooting off the bean-bag. I see a lot of mixed results from review sites. Is this a relevant feature? Maybe just for wide shots and landscapes of baobab's?
- Autofocus: Between these three, is there really much difference in practice? I'm admittedly not great with auto-focus and will need some practice using whichever body I end up with.
- Size: I prefer smaller, all else constant (love my MX), but not bothered by a larger camera if it's to make room for more IQ. Kp over K-3ii? K-1 with FA 35/2.0 or DA 40/2.8 looks pretty awesome.
- GPS: This would be awesome, maybe not a deal breaker. K-3ii over Kp?
- Wifi: An underrated feature. Why wait days/weeks to share photos? Why does my family only get to look at photos taken with my iPhone?
- Dual cards: maybe useful but, again, buffer will suffer. I usually have just purchased smaller cards to change throughout my trip. On past trips, I've even treated them like film.
- The 150-500 should be long enough in either format. I've already contacted Sigma about upgrading the mount. If they can't update it, the decision will be between the K-3ii and Kp. I don't use long lenses much and prefer to spend on shorter primes.
- Cost: cheaper is better, naturally. Going for the most expensive option wont cause the children to starve. It's really just if I can mentally justify the expense.
Lastly, I'm currently living in Singapore so renting isn't an option.
Thanks for reading such a long post. All thoughts welcome and appreciated.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-04-2011, 05:04 PM
|
| |
Thanks for taking the time to comment Ash. Yours and all comments are sincerely appreciated.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-03-2011, 12:01 PM
|
| |
I don't have really strong feelings on the first one. But I'll comment on the second.
It has a sort of cinematic quality to it. I think it definitely evokes the the feelings that you were looking for. The composition and DOF look about just right. On the other hand, I think this has been done before. I think if I went down to the movie store, I'd find a DVD cover with a similar image. This might be the reason he didn't speak much about it: he's seen it before.
One smaller item is the gun looks noticeably plastic. You're in Dallas. Don't they give clocks away with happy meals? ...kidding, but the little details of a real gun would add a bit more edginess to the picture.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-03-2011, 11:41 AM
|
| |
NewportPreacher, Thank you for taking the time, your honest critique is very much appreciated. This picture was also taken last fall; I'm just now sorting through them.
I'd love to hear from more thoughts: good, bad, or uninspired. You're not going to hurt any feelings here:p.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-02-2011, 02:36 PM
|
| |
I agree with Heiberg re: background and composition. I also like her posture, but there's something strange about her expression. She seems reacting to something, but that something isn't in the frame.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-02-2011, 12:31 PM
|
| |
Taken at 2pm along one of the rivers that feed Tonle Sap. Critique appreciated.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-02-2010, 09:15 PM
|
| |
I think colored K-x's are the coolest, especially paired with a pancake lens. Great cameras don't have to be big, black, or have a battery grip. Similarly, a lens doesn't have to have a dinner-plate size front element and a 6 inch barrel to take a great shot.
When I'm at a cafe and I see someone with a color k-x, it says the owner cares more about taking great shots and having fun than the guy with the 5D MII and 28-300 zoom, who really just wants to look like a serious photographer.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-02-2010, 10:44 AM
|
| |
I agree it's a great lens (even if too large/heavy) and I've been on the lookout for one at a reasonable price. I guess what I'm getting at is that Pentax doesn't really have a fast wide lens in their lineup. I'm okay with crop sensors and 10mp is plenty for me, but I hope Pentax continues to look into some faster, wider lenses.
I think that the success of the FA ltd.'s and the resale values of the FA* 24/f2's should offer some insight into the demand of a fast, wide-enough-to-still-be-wide-on-a-digital angle lens.
Again, it's just my rant. I think that Pentax was definitely on the right track when they came up with the 21 pancake concept. Small, light, wide, metal-- what's not to like? Only the speed and that I can't use it on an MX body. Maybe I should have checked the "would buy if updated" box.;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-02-2010, 08:37 AM
|
| |
I want to throw my hat in for this, but I would like a wide and fast lens that could be used with a film camera. The DA 21 and 35 are both a bit too slow. For indoor shots, that extra stop is the difference between 1/30 and 1/60 - a huge difference in sharpness when I'm shooting anything that's alive (mostly people in bars).
The FA 31 Ltd is perfect (if a little large) on a film or full frame camera, but it's no-longer wide if you mount it to a digital.
In short, an FA 21/f2 would do nicely. Looking at the DA 21 reviews, others also seem to agree with all of these points. Even among the lenses Pentax stopped making, there's really nothing wide and fast. The Ziess stuff is nice, but I think Pentax could do it just as well, at least as cheaply.
(and since I'm making a wish-list, might I ask for a 9-blade aperture diaphragm:) .........and maybe even f1.7:D?)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-02-2010, 08:09 AM
|
| |
I own the 16-50 and I would like an upgraded version. I would be curious to see who of those who own this lens also own the 50-135. I do.
For what it's worth, here's my list of suggestions, but consider that it is often only in comparison to the 50-135.
1. I would prefer an internal zoom. -I'm not sure this is possible, but the double extending action makes me wonder if it's less weather resistant than the 50-135.
2. A larger zoom ring versus the focus ring. I don't think many people manually focus this lens, but most people do use the zoom.
3. Improve the focus throw. I rarely manually focus this lens because the short focus throw makes it so difficult.
4. Make it shorter. It's as long as the 50-135 when it's fully zoomed.
5. There's some barrel distortion on the wide end, but it really cleans up at 18mm. This doesn't bother me as much as it probably should.
I've already dropped the cash on this and there's really nothing better to replace it with other than a set of primes. I would imagine that it's really essential for wedding photography, but I don't do that. There's been more than one occasion that I've thought about downgrading to the 18-55 WR but I think I would miss the speed and constant aperture when indoors and the pictures I get from this lens are so sharp.
Let me know if I'm the only one that feels like this.:confused:
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-18-2010, 10:48 AM
|
| |
I just brought home a MX, and I'm having trouble seeing things clearly through the eyepiece. I don't wear glasses and my vision is pretty good.
My other cameras are a K200D and Leica M3. I keep the diopter adjustment slid all of the way to right on the K200D and I never have any trouble with the Leica's rangefinder.
What's the deal with this? Are my eyes bad and I'm just unaware? Things seem to sharpen up if pull my eye back about 1/2 and inch, but then I can't see the edges of the frame.
I've seen some websites stating the camera has a -1.0 diopter eyepiece. Is this correct? Should it be +/-0? Any help is appreciated. While I'm liking the camera, I'm afraid this could be a deal-breaker.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-26-2010, 11:45 PM
|
| |
Thanks for your comments.
A brief explanation:
I was trying to capture the interaction between the girl and the woman in the mirror. The story is that I was in a museum looking at this piece and noticed that the girl just in front of me was just as interested as I was. I had noticed the girl and her sister running around being kids but this piece really grabbed her attention.
The focus doesn't bother me personally, but I wanted to get the opinion of others. I might have liked to get the fish in the tank a little more crisp. I also want to see if the story is coming through.
I haven't decided on a title yet. I want to sort of push the story of two people at different places in their lives locked eyes were frozen for a moment.
The only post processing I did was to take some purple out, which really only affects the color of cloth under the fish tank. I had thought about how this might look in b+w or with some small changes but decided to get some comments before I butchered it too much.
zombiecat: I hadn't noticed the difference in saturation between the little girl and everything else. He skin tone is definitely not correct. I like the desaturated look. You seem to have a good idea of what I was trying to do with this shot so a big thanks again for your comment.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
03-25-2010, 09:48 AM
|
| |
The details on the wall are framed projections.
Comments are appreciated.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-20-2010, 08:31 AM
|
| |
RE: "In a related story, Japanese police will be required to undergo training in manual focusing."
As a DA* 16-50 owner, I would tell them to not waste too much time with manual-focus training. My single biggest complaint with this lens is the focus throw.
|
