|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-08-2007, 07:31 PM
|
| |
Most successful companies launch and market products that have a sense of progression. That is, if I buy an entry level model today, and skip the next new and best model released, I can expect there to be another one, just over the hill to satisfy my future needs. Despite the fact that Pentax has produced two great DSLR cameras, they need to feed this sense of progression that is needed by loyal customers.
Honda has a product cycle of about 4 years, BMW and AUDI about 6 years between major model updates. Canon and Nikon have established a cycle. Has and will Pentax? Our belief that they will meet our future needs is of utmost importance if they are to gain and hold market share. They are however silent. They can't afford to play the game the same way Nikon and Canon can. The only advertising I see for Pentax is a couple 2nd tier billboards with lackluster advertising. They need to get closer to their loyal user base, something that Apple has leveraged successfully. Unreliable rumors through people loosely associated with Pentax doesn't build confidence.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-08-2007, 05:16 AM
|
| |
Mprins, thanks for the clarification. I didn't realize that AWB was designed to deal with a narrow range of color temperatures. I know many DSLR's have this limitation with incandescent, or tungsten lights. I wonder why this is, whether it's an intentional design or if the technology of AWB is just not there yet?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-07-2007, 06:03 PM
|
| |
I looked at the Canon 350 and 400 but their auto focus sensor system was not as advanced as the Pentax and the body was awkward to hold. The K100d may have slower AF but it locks on accurately with few mistakes. Also Canon and Nikon required expensive lenses if you wanted shake reduction. The Sony A100 was my other option but once again, the Pentax felt better ergonomically when I picked it up and the price was way better. The Nikon D80 is a great camera but was much more expensive.
I've managed to acquire a K100d body, an SMC 18- 55 zoom, an SMC 50- 200mm zoom and a 50mm A 1.7 prime lens(used) for about CA$1000. I think that's a selling point right there. Also the fact that lenses are so available and of such good quality for the price pushed me to Pentax.
Now, there are a few negatives I have found which I think are common knowledge now. Auto white balance in not too accurate in incandescent light. I set it manually when indoors. The ISO 200 default with exposure compensation when auto ISO is set is a bit strange, the lack of ISO readout in the viewfinder too, and the fact that the ISO settings don't have a hard button to access them quickly are a few. Most of the time I don't use Auto ISO so the ISO 200 thing is not an issue. After two months however, I am getting used to the controls and these limitations are minor and easily worked around.
As for the 6 mega pixel limitation I haven't really printed that much so I haven't run up against the limitation. The major advantage to me was to move from P and S to DSLR. I must say that in my point and shoot days, my 5 Mpix Casio compact never came close to my 3.2 Mpix Olympus C3000 which still to this day has the most faithful colour reproduction although it's rendered useless due to a built in hard coded software bug.
I do my fair share of cruising in camera stores and have no regrets with my K100D purchase. Maybe in a coupe of years if I outgrow it, it will become my 2nd body and the to-be-announced K2D or K1D will become my primary body.
I have 2 friends with beautiful and very expensive Canon systems a 5D and a 30D but their heavy cameras are usually back at home when they talk about their systems. My k100d because it's easier to carry and less obtrusive is usually on my shoulder.
Not to mention, I kind of like the "we try harder", 2nd tier status of Pentax. There's something inherently efficient about getting the same or better results with a camera system costing so much less :).
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-05-2007, 05:31 PM
|
| |
Looks like dust to me. I had a similar thing and used a rubber bulb blower to get rid of it. Before I remove my lens, I always blow around the bayonet mount to get rid of dust clinging to it. Seems to help.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-05-2007, 05:28 AM
|
| |
Thanks, Lowell, I'll try to locate an adapter. You bring up a good point; if the cost of the adapter approches the cost of the filter, buying one seems pointless. The 49mm filters seem not to be regularly stocked items. I see you're in TO too. Do you know of a good used camera store that may carry used filters etc? I used flm SLRs years ago so I'm starting over again.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-05-2007, 03:56 AM
|
| |
I have SMC 18 - 55mm, SMC 50 - 200 and SMC A 50mm 1.7 with have 52mm, and 49mm filter ring sizes. Is an adapter available for my 50mm lens if I buy polarizing and ND filters for my zooms? And, if so, does the added distance of the adapter have any impact on the function of the filter?
Thanks, David
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-02-2007, 06:36 PM
|
| |
When compensating exposure, it reverts always to ISO 200! PLease fix this...and why does it do it?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-30-2007, 05:30 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the reply. So it is similar to using the OK button to disengage AF if you have it set to MF.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-29-2007, 03:06 PM
|
| |
I keep reading about the quick override feature of the SMC FA 50-200mm lens using a "quick twist". I've been overriding using the OK button.
How does this feature work with the lens?
David
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
09-29-2007, 02:52 PM
|
 | Chloe
Posted By
DMH |
Replies: 3
Views: 1,618
|
|
What lens at what f/stop did you use?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
09-28-2007, 07:01 AM
|
| |
I've read a few posts about changing the focus screen on the K100d which seems to be quite simple but some have reported that they have to compensate with the exposure. Anyone had first hand experience, and, is there a supplier you can recommend in Canada or the US?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
09-27-2007, 10:40 AM
|
| |
Thanks Tom, I was looking in the wrong place in the VF. It all seems so simple when you do it correctly :).
David
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
09-27-2007, 09:51 AM
|
| |
I have a "new" Pentax SMC A 50mm f/1.7 lens and when I power up my K100d, it asks me to confirm the focal length each time. Is this normal or is there a setting that lets me set it and forget it?
Also, focus wide open has to be very exact as I expected with the shallow DOF. I can't quite get the hang of the camera confirming focus with the red square. Should I be setting this to constant or single. It seems to flash briefly when I depress shutter release half way and then stop. Not enough time to work with MF.
Only had the lens one day and still figuring it out. Love the sharp pics so far.
Any input or observations welcome.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-23-2007, 07:07 PM
|
| |
If you read my thread about 2 weeks ago about me locating a Vivitar 55-210 Series 1, 3rd edition, you already know that I "settled" for the Pentax DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED zoom when that sale didn't work out
. A few members in their usual understated manner advised me that it's "quite a good lens" for the money etc. etc. Thanks again for your input
My conclusion is, that I need to learn to read between the lines. I love this lens! I had 2 hours alone at a nearby park on Lake Ontario and shot a few pictures which are in my Photobucket album at:
truedavi - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
I hope this link works, as I am new to linking and posting photos. I shot these RAW on my K100d and processed them in Pentax photo lab as a batch and tweeked the levels a bit in Shop. Most are uncropped because I like to try to crop in camera.
I'm having a bit of a time calibrating my screen gamma and do find that the photos are a bit "hot" or over saturated. Like rich food, great for a couple of bites but may get to be too much after a while. I have Bibble pro but haven't figured out how to get an acceptable conversion from .PEF. Seems like I just need a bit more time with it. Reviews say it's great. I find Lightroom has an overly complicated and somewhat obscure interface. But, maybe there too, I just need to clear the time to work through it.
Anyway, I find this lens is sharp (except at 200 extreme) and has great contrast and colour. Kudos to Pentax for making it so affordable too.
I hope my 18-55 doesn't accumulate too much dust. I've also bought a SMC Pentax 50mm-A 1.7 from Henry's on Ebay and should get that within a week.
Too many great lenses and too little time to use them.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-12-2007, 03:38 AM
|
| |
Kguru, I like your logic, makes sense to me. Gives us a constant value which compares what really matters, that is, how does it affect my photo.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-12-2007, 02:45 AM
|
| |
That is that focal length is focal length no matter what size film or sensor is used. The field of view (FOV) changes, not the focal length which is the distance from the film/sensor plane to the point of focus to the rear principal plane of the lens. Actually it only applies when the lens is focused on infinity. The quoted focal length actually changes when focused on an object closer than infinity.
Am I being too thin skinned or is "flawed" a little undiplomatic?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-11-2007, 01:57 PM
|
| |
My understanding is that the dynamic range of digital sensors on current DSLRs is greater than on "standard" film. I checked my facts and found this exhaustive comparison. Clarkvision: Dynamic Range of an Image
Check it out, the conclusion and the tests seem to back up my statement but I must be honest, I just glanced at the tests and read the conclusion. Film seems to have greater range in other areas according to the test.
Aside from the dynamic range, cinematographers seem to prefer film because they can "steer" it in a particular direction more easily than digital. It's about exclusion. Or they may just be more used to it. This allows them to follow the intended script narrative by excluding or selectively including. Blowing out the highlights for example allow you to have a window without a backdrop. We're so used to it that it seems natural. We even create "blown out" backdrops that are very soft to mimic the shallow depth of field of film. It's crept into our visual vocabulary and will be hard to replace.
The 2004 film starring Tom Cruise as a hitman, Collateral was shot on digital. It allowed the use of available light and was quite noisy and gritty, a look that worked well with the subject matter. There seemed to be little correction for different colour temperatures which also worked to make it feel real. Point is, that digital seems to be a specific look in motion pictures.
As I said in an earlier post, the inclusiveness of digital seems to help still photograph. Our vision is cumulative over time and what we imagine we see is seldom reflected in the fraction of a second it takes for a photo. Or maybe motion pictures gain by compressing time and stills gain by expanding it or freezing it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-11-2007, 03:17 AM
|
| |
Camera megapixels will continue to grow. Maybe not exponentially with respect to time like computer CPUs but the density and size will keep adjusting to reflect technological advances. Therefore, neither the pixel density or chip size will remain constant and therefor the associated FOV of each lens will vary.
At some point I suppose I will have to forsake the connection developed during my film camera days, of a particular focal length to it's 35mm FOV.
When and if sensor densities exceed what we can use, ie. see with our eyes (can't believe I wrote that :)) then we could possibly carry one really good prime and resort to digital zoom to adjust field of view. It all sound so inelegant and opposed the very nature of photograph. But, so did digital cameras when they came out.
I work in the film industry and i'd say 99% of movies are shot on film stock. Cinematographers I've talked to dislike the ability to "see into the shadows" that digital sensors give. The wide exposure latitudes of digital removes the mystery and requires a lot more detail and a higher level of detail on the sets we build.
Still photography seems to benefit from the additional information whereas in movies it can be a distraction.
But I stray from the topic.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-09-2007, 04:52 PM
|
| |
So the terminology "equivalent to" is in fact that. Is there a physical reason why the sensor could not be moved forward to produce the same FOV of the 35mm film plane further back? Would that put it into the glass, or is it a focus problem requiring the "film plane" to remain where it is?.
Maybe I should forget all this and go out and take some photos. Becoming an armchair photographer so early in my career.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-09-2007, 02:30 PM
|
| |
If the DA series is manufactured specifically for the chip on Pentax digital cameras, why retain the focal length reference to full frame 35mm film cameras? They will not work on a full frame camera anyway because they can't cover the chip.
Will this standard still remain in the future when camera chips possibly exceed the full frame holy grail too? Is there no other constant that can be used, similar to F stops that doesn't vary from chip to chip?
I suppose that if we still retain "horsepower" as a legitimate measurement for engine power, that the 35mm reference will be with us long after the last piece of film is made.
Just a drizzly Sunday afternoon rumination seemingly not destined to reach any conclusion.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-09-2007, 02:17 PM
|
| |
A strange twist to it all. When it seems things are too good to be true, they usually are.
It turns out that the lens I was going to buy is a rare 62mm filter ring version of the 4th edition made by Conina, not the 3rd edition made by Komine. No misrepresentation by the seller, just the wrong questions asked. It's supposedly quite rare and very little has been written on it except to mention that they do exist.
So, I bit the bullet and bought the Pentax 50 - 200 f/4-5.6 ED I'd been eyeing and have been quite pleased with it so far. I'm really liking how compact the new lens is.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-07-2007, 05:19 AM
|
| |
Yes I did see it, very infornative.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-07-2007, 04:02 AM
|
| |
At least it's too small to become another clothing rack like my other workout equipment in the basement ;).
I notice there is a Pentax 80 - 200 manual focus zoom, I think f/4.5 or so on ebay but it sells for quite a low price. Is this reflective of it's quality?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-06-2007, 07:35 PM
|
| |
Sorry it's taken so long to reply but things have been a bit busy this week.
I found out from the seller that the lens in an FA mount and does have an A setting. I had looked at a photo while researching the lens on the net and that lens didn't have an A setting so I assumed...
Looks like I will be buying the lens this weekend and am looking forward to trying it. Thing is that the buyer and I seem to be equally busy so Sunday is the soonest I can try it.
Pity I didn't have it today when I was required to record the cornice of a 3 storey historic building from ground level. My 18 to 55 kit lens was a bit soft at the 55 extreme although they are record shots so we can copy it for a film shoot.
Thanks for taking the time to post the replies and photos. I'll post a few shots when I get the lens.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-05-2007, 06:14 AM
|
| |
I have the option of buying a mint Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f2.8-4, 62mm (3rd version 28... serial number) lens for under ca$100. I have a K100d with the kit 18-55 lens and am looking for a longer telephoto lens. The reviews of the Vivitar are great but it is manual and doesn't have an A setting on the aperture ring.
The alternative is the Pentax 50 - 200 zoom lens which sells for about ca$230 after tax, is autofocus but reputed to be a soft lens. How would I have to meter with the Vivitar...do I have to use M on the camera and push AE-L after setting "Use aptr ring" in the menus?
The real question I suppose is, is the extra inconvenience and weight of the Vivitar worth the extra quality i'd be getting? The telephoto shots I'd be taking would be deliberate and take longer setup, I suppose autofocus may not be such a problem in those circumstances... I'm realy wondering about the slower metering thing.
Also, there is the extra $130 I'd be saving for a used 50 or 35mm Pentax prime :hmm:
|
