|
Forum: General Talk
11-22-2010, 12:20 PM
|
| |
Thanks for pointing that out.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-22-2010, 10:54 AM
|
| |
Yes, I'd be interested to hear about this too.
Anyone had luck with FredMiranda.com? Canon and Nikon sells like hotcakes there, but I don't see much Pentax gear. Couldn't hurt to try, though - it's free.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-22-2010, 10:23 AM
|
| |
I used to have no trouble selling gear here. But I just posted a K-x and an FA50/1.4, and haven't had a nibble. I researched prices beforehand, and I think what I'm asking is fair for each item. $415 for the K-x + 18-55 kit, which is almost brand new (1500 clicks), and $300 for the FA50, which is also in mint condition. Prices include shipping and Paypal.
In the past I'd get several inquiries within a few days of posting. Not happening so far. Is it harder to sell gear here now, or are my prices just too high?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-21-2010, 04:40 PM
|
| |
And here's a sharp puppy to go with the sharp chicken. (Actually, not particularly sharp but I like the picture anyways. Imagine that!)
 |
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-19-2010, 11:59 AM
|
| |
Yes, that's exactly my point. If most people spent even 25% of the time they spend researching and talking about gear on improving their technique and just taking pictures, they'd be a lot better photographers.
If you doubt that, check out this Chase Jarvis portfolio - all taken with a 3 MP iPhone.
I like talking about gear too, and of course I want to get the best quality image I can. But I always try to remember that the technical factors are almost always secondary.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-19-2010, 08:56 AM
|
| |
Not to mention the fact that sharpness is only one of several factors that determine whether a picture will make an impact on the viewer - and often not the primary one at all. There have been many memorable images produced through the ages that were not "razor sharp". I know this is a gear forum, it's fun to compare specs, and we all want the potential for sharp pictures, but at some point too much of this analysis makes it easy to lose sight of the goal. Which, for me at least, is to produce pictures that move people in some way. I guarantee you that "sharpness" is not one of the highest criteria on the list (for most normal people) of what determines whether a picture has that effect.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-18-2010, 07:23 PM
|
| |
I'll try to post some more pics tomorrow at different ISOs, in different lighting conditions. You won't see any focus charts or bottles and Teddy Bears lined up against a wall, though :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-18-2010, 03:03 PM
|
| |
Here's another 100% crop of Red the Chicken. This time, I adjusted the sharpening and detail in LR:
Here are a few other shots. These are unsharpened and unadjusted.
The only one where I see a little bit of the softness/blur people might be talking about is in the last 100% crop of the arm of the bench, with the bug. However, a bit of sharpening in LR tightens it up nicely:
 |
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-18-2010, 02:00 PM
|
| |
I have a K5 on loan from a friend, with the venerable FA43. Took a few quick snaps in the backyard today. I see no problem at all with sharpness. These were shot in RAW, converted to JPEG with no adjustments at all. f/3.5 @1/100 ISO 200.
Here's the 100% crop.
They look even better with just a touch of sharpening in LR.
I have a few more shots I'll post to this thread in a while. Nothing special, just taking it for a spin.
My main concern was AF speed, and I'm happy to report that even with the FA43 (not the fastest focusing lens in the Pentax line-up) it's much snappier than my K-x.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-14-2010, 05:35 PM
|
| |
Isn't that what the Sigma 30/1.4 is (provided you get a good copy)?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-14-2010, 12:00 PM
|
| |
Has there been any mention of a v2 of this lens?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-14-2010, 11:48 AM
|
| |
So does that mean it's not possible to adjust the aperture, ISO and shutter speed before and during video capture with the K5? I wasn't able to find any information on this.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-14-2010, 10:55 AM
|
| |
I'm trying to figure out what the main differences are in video mode between the K5 and 5DII. From what I've gathered the primary difference is that the 5DII shoots in 1080p at 30fps, while the K5 shoots in 1080p at 25fps.
I read that the firmware update for the 5DII now permits changing the aperture, ISO and shutter speed before and during video capture. Does the K5 permit this as well?
Of course the K5 has in-body SR, which the 5DII does not.
Any other big differences?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-14-2010, 09:13 AM
|
| |
The only thing that has discouraged me from using this as my "fast 50" equivalent is the rather low maximum magnification, at .10x (vs. .17x for the 35/2.4 and .16x for the 35/2). This isn't a huge problem, but I do appreciate the ability to work in close with a walkaround lens.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-14-2010, 07:52 AM
|
| |
Where does the Kx fit into that progression? That's the camera I currently have. Will I see a significant difference in AF speed with the K5 using the same lenses?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-13-2010, 07:34 PM
|
| |
You may be right, Impartial, about IQ of the lenses. But a 50/1.4 on a 5D will have more than a 2 stop advantage in terms of DOF than the 35/2.4 on a Pentax APS-C.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-13-2010, 07:00 PM
|
| |
Well, I used to have a K10D and a 5D, and I can tell you the 5D beat the pants off the K10D in terms of AF speed - at least with the lenses I had, which were the 50/1.4, 100/2 & Tamron 28-75 for the 5D, and various lenses including the 21/3.2 (fastest of the bunch), 35/2, 43/1.9, 50/1.4, 77/1.8 and 18-50/2.8 (Sigma) on the K10D.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-13-2010, 03:12 PM
|
| |
Oops. Forgot to clarify something Elho said.
Is the K5 faster with AF than the 5D?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-13-2010, 03:07 PM
|
| |
Thanks everyone. Ken T: the 100/2.8 sounds like a fantastic lens, but unfortunately on an APS-C it's too long for my needs.
Elho: with my limited budget, I'll have to sell old gear in order to afford gear. What you say makes sense, but it's not possible for me at present.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-13-2010, 11:58 AM
|
| |
I was getting massive amounts of dust on the sensor, to the point where I'd have to clean it every week. And I wasn't shooting in bad weather or dusty conditions at all. After doing more research, I'm fairly certain there must have been a bad seal somewhere because other 5D owners don't have the same problem - at least not to the same degree.
But it was so irritating that I swore I'd never get another one at the time. The other issue with the 5D is that it's very limited in terms of future. I've really gotten used to the TAv mode and in-body SR on Pentax bodies, and while I'm not sure that's enough to sway me, it's a consideration.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-13-2010, 11:12 AM
|
| |
Thanks both for your replies.
Impartial: what leads you to the conclusion that the IQ of the K-5 with 35/2.4 and 70/2.4 would be better than a 5D with 50/1.4 & 100/2? I'm curious, because the 50/1.4 and 100/2 are very well rated lenses on every review site, and the 5D IQ is pretty legendary - even now.
Kryosphinx: used 5D bodies go for $1,000-1,100 on Fred Miranda. 50/1.4 is $300 - $350 depending on used or new, 100/2 is about $380 - $430 and Tamron 28-75 is $380 - $460. I was planning on buying used gear if I go the Canon route - should have mentioned that. So, with a used 5D body and three used lenses it would cost me about $2,100.
Keep in mind that a 100/2.8 on Pentax is not remotely the same focal length as a 100/2 on a 5D. Much too long for indoor use. The DA70 and FA77 are my only Pentax choices in this focal range.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-13-2010, 08:58 AM
|
| |
I'm still trying to decide between keeping my K-x, upgrading to a K-5, or going back to a Canon 5D. I mostly take pictures of people. I'm expecting a child in a few months so of course that will become a focus. IQ, low-light ISO and AF-speed are most important to me. Other bells & whistles not so much. Video is a nice bonus, but I have a dedicated video camera so not essential. Lens selection at the following effective focal lengths is also very important:
- 50mm
- 100mm
- 28-75mm
I previously had a 5D with 50/1.4, 100/2 and Tamron 28-75/2.8. It was perfect for me - met all of the needs I described above - except that it was an incredible dust magnet. I sold that gear for mostly personal/financial reasons, and when I recently decided to get back in to photography I bought a K-x + 50/1.4 because I couldn't afford another 5D.
Things are better now financially, so I have a little more flexibility. I have about $2,000 to spend. My choices are:
- Stick with the K-x. Sell 50/1.4 (@$300) and get the Sigma 30/1.4, Pentax DA70/2.4 or FA77, and Sigma or Tamron 17-50. Cost: $1,500 - $1,800 depending whether I get the DA70 or FA77.
- Upgrade to K-5. Sell K-x & 50/1.4 (@$700) and get only Sigma 30/1.4 and DA70 for now. Cost: $1,700.
- Sell my K-x & 50/1.4 (@$700) and get a 5D with 50/1.4, 100/2 & Tamron 28-75. Cost: $1,300.
From a sheer cost perspective, seems like the last option makes the most sense. A full-frame, great IQ, good high ISO body with three excellent (not "L" quality, but all highly regarded) and fast lenses. The 5D's AF speed with these lenses was very good. Main hesitation here is the dust magnetism of the 5D. It was a constant problem, and very irritating.
I'm uncertain as to whether upgrading to a K-5 is worth the extra cost from a K-x, considering my needs. The K-x has fine IQ and its high ISO stands up quite well to the K-5 from what I've seen. I'm not entirely pleased with the AF performance (at least with my 50/1.4), so that's one potential reason to upgrade.
But as much as I've enjoyed Pentax, the issue is that it seems the Canon lenses available at the focal lengths I need and the price I can afford are higher quality and/or faster than the Pentax equivalents. For example, the 50/1.4 is only about $330. The closest equivalents would be the Pentax 35/2.4 (too slow for me) and the Sigma 30/1.4 (more expensive, and focus issues with some copies). At 100mm, Canon has the excellent 100/2 for just over $400, whereas Pentas has the DA70/2.4 (slower, more expensive) or the FA77 (faster, much more expensive). The 28-75 EFL zooms are all about the same price, so it's a wash there.
Since narrow DOF is a consideration (I like the artsy people shots with very blurred backgrounds), the 5D becomes even more attractive. In addition to the lenses being faster, there's the additional stop of DOF because of full-frame.
I know it sounds like I'm talking myself into the 5D. And maybe I am. But I wanted to see if you have any insight or thoughts.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-11-2010, 06:47 PM
|
| |
The most interesting thing about those comparisons to me is what happens when you bring up the K-x. It looks very close to the K-5 at 12800. The D700 looks significantly better than both, to my eye at least.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-11-2010, 08:48 AM
|
| |
I know (from experience) that the FA43 & FA77 (and to a lesser degree, the FA31) are among the slowest focusing lenses in Pentax's line-up. I've also heard that the AF speed with the K-5 is vastly improved.
Since AF speed is important to me, I'd love to hear from anyone that has these lenses and a K-5. I imagine they are still slower to focus than DA lenses like the 40/2.8 and 70/2.4, simply due to mechanics. But I'm hoping the AF is significantly better than it is on, say, the K-x.
What's your experience?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-09-2010, 08:28 AM
|
| |
I don't disagree, junyo. That's why I'm considering going back to full-frame in a different mount. There just aren't any fast lenses I can afford in the desired focal length range in Pentax's line-up.
|
