|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-09-2016, 11:50 AM
|
| |
Took me a week to get around to gathering my newly extended family together for an updated portrait:
oops, uncle Battery Grip for the K-5 forgot to show up. Oh well, he's always drunk anyways.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
04-28-2016, 02:22 PM
|
| |
I'll know the moment my pre-order with Ricoh gets packed up for shipping because I get instant notification via email whenever my AmEx gets charged. So far, nothing... this is lame.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
04-27-2016, 08:21 PM
|
| |
Right... couldn't be because 99% of those posts were from before the "like" feature was implemented.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
05-24-2014, 10:36 AM
|
| |
That expression is beyond stupid. A focal length is what it is. It either suits your purpose or it doesn't. There's nothing "awkward" about it.
A small prime lens with bicycle handles attached to it... that would be awkward.
A zoom lens with a bright pink phallic symbol painted on it... that would be awkward.
A telephoto lens with razor sharp blades around the focus ring... that would be awkward.
But a lens that provides a specific focal length that some photographers can make use of? Not awkward at all. If you have no use for that focal length in your photography endeavors, why are you buying that lens and then bitching about its focal length? It boggles the mind...
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-07-2014, 03:50 PM
|
| |
Canon discontinued the APS-H line to consolidate 2 camera lines into one and save money. Most 1D owners are still 1D owners. They have not "upgraded" to the 1D X. Everyone who's ever owned a camera with an APS-H sensor loves the format.
A smaller sensor will always be faster than a larger one of the same generation using the same technology. It's just physics.
A larger sensor will always have better image quality than a smaller one of equivalent resolution in the same generation. Again, simple physics.
An APS-H sensor would have better IQ, low light performance, make better use of FF lenses, and give shallower depth of field than an APS-C sensor.
An APS-H sensor would be faster, lighter, provide more reach and result in a smaller camera than a FF sensor.
There's no downside here. None whatsoever. Just benefit. Add to that my second prediction of using sensor-shift to produce 4x the resolution in controlled environments, and you've got a simple-to-produce blockbuster camera with specs that most professional photographers would drool over.
edit: I've been erroneously referring to the Canon 1Ds when I meant to refer to the Canon 1D. I've gone back and fixed my earlier posts in this regard.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
04-23-2016, 12:08 PM
|
| |
I have a 2001 Audi A4 Avant quattro. It used to be a 1.8T with 5-speed manual, but I swapped in a TDI and 6-speed manual over the last winter. Has a full custom sound system with 2 amps, electronic crossover and electronic EQ.
What I love about it:
- small and maneuverable in parking lots
- tons of cargo space
- fits me perfectly
- fantastic mileage (can you say 50+ mpg?)
- fast as a bat out of hell (220 hp, 450+ ft-lb of torque)
- unbelievable traction in every condition
- grips the road like glue
- it's bright blue and fun to look at
- everything on it still works after all these years (280,000 miles so far)
- custom audio system sounds fantastic
- when the sound system is off, the car is very quiet inside
What I don't like about it:
- could use more leg room in the back seat
- driver's seat leather is torn at the seams
- can't pull a trailer
- cupholders are a joke
Old photo (pre-TDI swap)
During the swap:
Currently swapping out a fender that was rusted out, then I'll take a more current photo.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
11-11-2013, 11:37 AM
|
| |
Thought I'd share this with other Pentax users who might be pondering an upgrade from a K-5 to a K-3 like I did. I ended up taking the plunge, and I'm very happy I did. I pre-ordered a K-5 back when they were first announced over 3 years ago. I went through 2 bad ones with the sensor staining issue, then finally got a good one which I immediately sold to buy a silver K-5 when those became available. I've had that silver K-5 since March 2011, and I've gotten VERY used to the way it works. Before that I had a K-7 from around the time when they became available for sale. I skipped over the K-5ii(s).
Please keep in mind, these observations pertain to the way *I* shoot, they may not relate to you or your own habits.
First things first, the stuff I love about the new K-3:
- dual SD cards! I've been wanting dual SD cards since the K-7, and I was very disappointed when the K-5 didn't have that feature. It's finally here, and it's awesome. I can shoot 24 RAW+ shots at 8,3fps. I tried a few scenarios using a pair of older 45MB/s cards. Writing time seems to be the same whether I write to both cards simultaneously or just to one card. But the ability to split up the two is incredibly useful.
- faster processing! I spend a lot less time waiting. There's still some delay in getting the rear LCD to display anything after a long burst of photos, but otherwise the experience is way more pleasant.
- more AF points! One of my biggest issues with the old AF sensor was getting the right focus spot centered over the precise location I needed to focus on.
- faster FPS for longer bursts! Makes it easier to get that perfect shot of a moving subject, like a jogger or a dog running. It gives me more choices of limb position. This is especially useful for sports photography.
- actual AF tracking that seems to work for real! Again, a great help for sports photography.
- focus peaking in Live View! I've seen focus peaking on other cameras before, but this is the first time I get to use it as a tool in my own photography. It's not perfect for critical focusing, but it's great for quick work.
- enhanced AF modes! And accessing those modes is easier than ever. I look forward to taking advantage of these new modes for sports photography.
- MANUAL FLASH CONTROL!!!! This is a HUGE one for me! From full power to 1/128. I've been desperate for manual on-camera flash control for endless years, and finally having this option is like a dream come true. I do lots of flash work with manual optical slaves, and it's a great relief to finally be able to use the camera's flash as "just another flash" rather than trying to work around its P-TTL quirks (sometimes pre-flash, sometimes not, sometimes the flash contributes, sometimes not, blablabla). I don't know if this was available on the K-5ii, but it definitely was not on my K-5, and it's a wondrous thing.
- selectable low-pass filter. This is a neat feature and seems to work very well. I love being able to select between max detail vs less interference. For the most part, I've found that pictures with and without the simulated low-pass sharpen equally well in post-processing, but the ones without low-pass require less sharpening which means I get fewer noise artifacts in the final product. However the sound caused by the simulated low pass filter is disconcerting. It's like a bizarre beep with each shot, and surprisingly noticeable. It also significantly slows down the FPS capability.
Now for some of the things I don't like. Remember, I've had my way of doing things for many, many years using cameras that worked essentially the same way during all that time, so some slight changes can be an annoying inconvenience for me.
- my beloved ISO 80 is gone :( There's no more expanded sensitivity setting in the custom menu. ISO now goes from 100 to 51,200. I used to shoot at ISO 80 almost all the time. Its loss is more annoying than I thought it would be. I was actually hoping the minimum available ISO setting would be lower this time, like ISO 50 or something. But no such luck.
- image review functions have changed. This is one of the most annoying changes for me. On the K-5, there was a simple shortcut I used all the time when reviewing images: press the info button once to see the histogram, press the Ok button to get rid of it. Nice and simple, just 2 buttons that worked immediately. On the K-3, pressing the info button now brings up an entire list of the different info screens available, and I have to click more buttons to select the one I want (the basic histogram). The process has gone from pressing one button once, to pressing 3 different buttons a total of 4 times. It may not seem like much, but I'm a big-time chimper. I'm always confirming exposure for pictures I've taken, and the new way of bringing up the histogram annoys me greatly. I assume this change was made to make it easier on newbies who may not know what all the info screens do during review, but I find no benefit to it at all, just annoyance.
- the new grip isn't as comfortable. While everyone else has mentioned that the grip on the K-3 is a positive redesign from the one on the K-5, my experience has been the other way. I have a first-generation silver K-5, which was unique in that it had a chunkier grip than the regular K-5. it was the only model to ever have it, and this chunky grip is superior in my opinion. It fits better in my hand and allows my fingers to sink in a bit more because it's more padded.
(K-3 on left, chunky grip K-5 on right)
- K-3 requires a new battery grip. This isn't such a big deal in my case since I got a silver K-3 which included a battery grip. But comparing my old D-BG4 to my new D-BG5, it seems to me like Ricoh purposely forced a minor change to the battery grip just to sell more of them. It's a rip-off.
That's about it! Notice I made no mention of the new imaging sensor. I haven't found any great benefit in image quality with this new sensor. The sensor in my K-5 is outstanding, and the one in this K-3 is equally outstanding. I have a full complement of DA and FA Limited lenses, some of which have been rebuilt by C.R.I.S. to ensure perfect element alignment. Neither sensor seems to do any better or worse with those lenses. Sure, the new 24mp pictures are BIGGER (in every sense of the way), but when they get printed in 24x16 or 8x10 or whatever, there's no noticeable difference between 24mp and 16mp. Both look excellent. This surprised me a bit since my K-5 has a low-pass filter and this K-3 does not. Maybe I just need to find the right kind of picture to really take advantage of the lack of a low-pass filter. I'll be experimenting with it some more in the near future to see what the differences really are and how they might benefit my photography.
Hope this helps someone!
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
02-15-2015, 08:48 AM
|
| |
RAW files aren't viewable photos, they're a collection of colorless pixels along with information about which section of the bayer filter was located at each pixel. Since it's colorless, it doesn't actually have any white balance. It's up to the RAW processing software to interpolate what color each pixel is supposed to be.
However each RAW file includes a really poor quality embedded JPG snapshot, so that you can browse through your RAW files without having to develop each one. It's a very low quality JPG snapshot, lower quality even than the lowest JPG quality available on your camera. THIS is what you're seeing when you review RAW photos on your camera. If you use RAW+ instead, then you'll be shown the full JPG photo on your camera rather than the crappy snapshot stored in the RAW file. So yes, the camera does "waste system resources on useless conversion of this kind" when shooting in just RAW (as you so kindly put it).
This snapshot DOES have a white balance value applied, and this white balance value is also stored separately in the RAW file as a reference for whatever RAW processing software you use to develop the file (called "As Shot" by most software). It's only a guideline and has no effect on the final output of the photo: you can choose whatever white balance value you desire in post processing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-19-2014, 07:38 AM
|
| |
So what? I'd buy it at that price. That's what a D750 sells for. That's what a 5D sells for. That price isn't the issue.
(and the first one who comments that I must have more money than sense will get run over by my 14 year old rust-infested car)
The issue is that Pentax executives have been confirming in interviews that a FF is in development for at least 2-3 years now, and no hair of it ever shows itself.
A couple of fat lens mules and yet another "confirmation" by yet another executive does not make FF any more real.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-18-2014, 08:51 PM
|
| |
blablabla... That's been "confirmed" for years now. Still waiting...
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-07-2014, 06:16 PM
|
| |
Sorry, I'm referring to mirror/shutter speed and responsiveness of sensor shift.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-07-2014, 11:18 AM
|
| |
You are incorrect in your opinion, this has already been determined years ago. But it seems it gets forgotten again with every new generation. This forum seems to repeat itself every few months long after conclusions have already been determined.
Again incorrect. It's been determined many times that an APS-H sensor would cost about the same as a FF sensor to acquire, but have many benefits. Plus it would fit in existing bodies, whereas a FF sensor would not. And, it would be different. That's the title of this thread. The last APS-H camera was discontinued 2 years ago. You're just rehashing the same old myths from previous years. The sensor from the 645z cropped down to APS-H size ends up being just about 20mp. So it's not like production would have to come from a void.
ahem... "the market want" or "what Fogel70 want"? I want an APS-H. It would suit my needs better and would be the perfect blend of benefits from APS-C and FF with none of the drawbacks.
Was the Canon 1D (Mark II/III/IV) really such a crappy, low-end camera? Or was it favored by many professional sports photographers? "The market" didn't seem to mind it so much. In fact, I never heard anyone say "My 1D is a great camera, but I sure wish it was full frame".
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-06-2014, 10:15 PM
|
| |
I can't be bothered to go over all 19 pages of this thread, so here are my guesses as to how Pentax could be "different", even if someone else already mentioned them.
APS-H has been brought up frequently recently. This would allow Pentax to use sensor-shift stabilization with older FF lenses (FF sensor shift might move out of the usable imaging circle on some lenses).
In keeping with the whole sensor shift theme, perhaps we could see some kind of pixel quadrupling, same as on some high end medium format cameras. The technology is already built into Pentax cameras, it's only a matter of harnessing the possibilities. They did just that with the AA filter simulation.
Both of those options are reasonably feasible in the existing K-3 body, there's no radical changes needed. Imagine an APS-H camera the size of a K-3 that can shoot portraits and landscapes at 80mp with fantastic image quality or sports and candids at 20mp with amazing low light performance. Not only is that truly unique, but it's actually likely.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-11-2014, 05:04 PM
|
| |
At which point can I put the word "clueless" back in my previous post without having the moderators jump down my throat? Seriously, this guy has NO IDEA what he's talking about whatsoever! There isn't even a hint of basic understanding in that ludicrous rant!
---------- Post added 03-11-14 at 08:17 PM ----------
Did you try this? Did it work successfully? Because I DID try it, and none of Trek's apps actually recognize the OFC-1 as a FLU card, so none of that worked for me. I tried official Trek apps (which have a horrible rating on the Play Store) and third party apps. None of them recognized the OFC-1 as a FLU card. If you did try it and it did really work, then I'd actually be willing to buy the card again and try it. If you're just guessing randomly... then stop doing that.
---------- Post added 03-11-14 at 08:14 PM ----------
The zooming function is arbitrarily disabled on the web page that the server displays. In Chrome, I can go into the Accessibilities section of the settings and enable "Allow zooming even for pages that disable it", which allowed me to zoom into pictures as deep as I wanted. I don't know if the Safari browser has an equivalent setting.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-07-2014, 06:06 PM
|
| |
OMG! I just got this sweet new zoom lens! It's a SMC Pentax DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR.
As soon as I pulled it out of the box, I just KNEW this thing was retina-slicing sharp. And it turned out to be true! Like a prime lens at every focal length, it's amazing (I know because I saw a picture from a prime lens posted on this forum last week)! The bokeh is oh-so-perfect and flawless, and the colour rendition... it's to die for. In fact, I already killed someone with it. It's THAT good!
The build quality is out of this world! All-metal construction, except for the plastic barrels, outer shell, focus ring and zoom ring. It came with an ultra-high quality front lens cap, and a pretty good rear cap. There's also a nice oddly-shaped plastic sleeve that fits around the zoom ring, I assume to protect the zoom ring during transport. How thoughtful!!! A zoom ring shield!!!
Since this lens is weather resistant, I figured I'd test it by submerging it in a large vat of diet Pepsi. It passed! But then the zoom ring became a little harder to turn. Probably just needs more breaking-in. Also, the buttons on the camera tend to stick now... typical Pentax quality control. When will they ever learn?
But that's not all! To further justify this lens' cost and convince myself and everyone else that I made a wise purchasing decision, this lens also auto focuses like greased lightning on ice, except it's completely silent! The SDM DC motor is perfection itself. There's nothing wrong with it, and never will be. Pentax clearly fixed all SDM issues. I can focus from my foot to the ceiling in less than one second flat.
After I gave myself whiplash by performing the above test repeatedly, I noticed that the lens also weighs relatively little compared to my friend's FA* 600mm F4. It's also a bit smaller than that lens, so that's a big plus. With the exception of overall sharpness, contrast and colour rendition, the image quality is EXACTLY THE SAME. I bet my friend gets real jealous when he sees this.
It's not all good and awesome, though. I did come across some problems. First and foremost, this range of focal length sucks. It's not at all what I needed. What I really needed was a 300mm F2.8 prime lens. Why isn't this lens like that? I'm deducting 2 points from its score because it's not the focal length I need. For that matter, the perfect lens would be a 10-600mm f1.2 zoom. With today's technology, this should be dead easy. But once again Pentax is behind the curve. Are you listening Pentax? Make a 10-600mm f1.2 macro lens that's weather-resistant, light as a feather, produces retina-slicing sharp pictures at all apertures, and has no aberrations or distortions whatsoever, and THEN I might start taking you seriously. Until then, Canon/Nikon/Casio will always have the upper hand!
Anyways, some samples to whet your appetite. Don't worry, I've got more coming!
My Dog
My TV (check out the bokeh!!!)
Macro Of My Dog
(I showed him one of these retina-slicing sharp pictures, that's why his eyes are bleeding)
You might need an optometrist to get your retinas un-sliced after looking at those pictures. Unfortunately, optometrists don't actually do surgery, so you'll have to live with deflated eyeballs for the rest of your life. Sorry.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-14-2014, 07:14 PM
|
| |
14 posts in 4+ years? If anything, I got you to increase your post count by 7.7% with just this one thread. I win.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-07-2014, 11:32 PM
|
| |
I am a PROFESSIONAL! I took those pictures using the 18-135mm attached to a K-x. That camera is amazing, even better than a Nikon D40. It has the most amazing picture quality ever, more than any real pro could ever need. But it's all a moot point, since pros like me don't care about gear.
Anyways, I have a wedding to shoot now. My buddy hired me for $40 because I have a DSLR. Plus I get free food.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-07-2014, 06:37 PM
|
| |
No, it's your retinas. They're sliced. I warned you.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-07-2014, 06:59 PM
|
| |
Like I said, a prime at every focal length... *swish*!
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 12:12 PM
|
| |
You are completely incorrect. And I take offense at being called stupid. However I won't retaliate by also calling you insulting names. I'll just tell you about how deeply wrong and uninformed you are.
(there, was THAT better, dearest moderators?)
A professional Nikon shooter can take a picture, have the RAW file show up on a laptop within seconds, and have an assistant process the file for immediate printing, thereby resulting in an on-the-spot sale. No shuttling of SD cards between devices, no hooking up a USB cable between shots...
Or, on assignment, a photographer can take a picture, have the RAW file show up on a tablet, do basic editing, and send it off to an editor across the continent for immediate approval.
This is the functionality I was expecting. Essentially the kind of functionality other camera manufacturers have provided for many years now. That first example was something I was planning on setting up this summer at a classic car show for people who want portraits with their cars. I've seen other photographers do it before, and it's very efficient and profitable. I was really hoping Pentax was finally catching up in this regard, but now I'll have to kludge up some other solution instead.
This is not a "pro" product. It is an expensive toy.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-06-2014, 06:01 PM
|
| |
I don't work with JPGs. How do I download a DNG file from the FLU card to a device?
---------- Post added 03-06-14 at 09:42 PM ----------
Wow, the more I play with this thing, the more disappointed I am. This is nothing like the WiFi features I've used on other cameras. Integrating this into a studio workflow would be downright painful, and would give me NO benefit. This is just a toy for amateurs to show off to their friends... as long as their friends are easily impressed.
I love my K-3. I hate this WiFi add-on. It's a poorly designed joke. Competitors are laughing their asses off right now.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
01-16-2014, 08:50 AM
|
| |
Bath Time
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-07-2014, 12:01 PM
|
| |
Because they look at the focal length numbers and think "ooohhh, a 9x setup with just 2 lenses, how convenient!" Then, as they gain more experience and skill, they start to realize that most of their pictures are taken at 3 or 4 specific focal lengths, and those big, heavy lenses are just an unnecessary burden. So they sell them and buy the prime or short-zoom lenses that better suit their own photography style.
I just described my own evolution as a photographer over the past many years. Except I initially got rid of my DA* lenses because of repeated SDM failures.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-07-2014, 05:55 AM
|
| |
Oh weird, that generalized statement made no sense at all. "zooms are about getting the job done"? Then primes and small, light lenses must be about dicking around, wasting time.
You may be puzzled, I am not. Of course, if all I had to go on was this "in-depth review", I'd be puzzled and unconvinced too... it's really a disappointing read. I'm so glad I didn't wait on the review before buying the lens, otherwise I would've missed out on something great.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
11-11-2013, 04:32 PM
|
| |
Nono! ChrisJ warns us that it's UNSTABLE and an INCENDIARY MATERIAL!!! It's not like they use magnesium in structural items or anything. Like engine blocks, wheels, and construction materials. No, it's DANGEROUS, and it was vital that he point this out to all of us who have been wielding magnesium-bodied cameras for countless years!
|
