|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
07-24-2013, 09:55 PM
|
| |
I bought a K-R a few years ago, mainly for my wife. It made me realize that I wanted the K-5. (I used to use a Mamiya 645 back in the 80's for weddings and portraits... but I had avoided digital cameras up until recently and took a hiatus from Photography.)
Since we were going to Italy for June... I felt it was time to splurge and buy the K-5IIs. The K-5IIs definitely takes better pictures than the K-R. Although I'm sure the K-30/K-50 are better than the older K-R, I can't see them being as good as the K-5II.
If I bought the K-50 it would probably work okay and be acceptable. But I'd be always wondering if I shouldn't have just paid jut a little extra and gone with the K-5II. I would hate always wondering. If there was a $300.00-$400.00 difference between the K-50 and the K-5II then things would be different; but it looks like less than a $100.00. So to me I couldn't NOT get at least the K-5II.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
05-26-2013, 03:07 PM
|
| |
My new K-5 IIs seems to be awesome. Just got it and haven't yet gone outside with it... been too busy.. and it has only been a day.
But I did take a candid of my Parrot. Hand held using the 50mm f1.4 and Tv at 1/80.
At first I wasn't too impressed... the eyes are grainy when you zoom in. Then I noticed the feathers and the hairs on the box edge at top of the frame.
 |
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
05-26-2013, 03:05 PM
|
| |
Howdy I might get up there and give you an IM before the drive up. The Botanical Gardens sounds like a good place to practice technique.
But sadly I can't go to the car show to take pictures of Italian cars. Because I'll be in Italy; probably taking pictures of Italian cars. :p
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
05-23-2013, 10:21 PM
|
| |
Wow... almost exactly two years since my first post.
I just ordered a K-5 IIs and a Sigma 18-250.
The new lens isn't really "good enough" for the K-5 IIs... but I think my 50 f1.4 and 90 f2.8 MACRO primes should work very well with it. I might eventually replace the MACRO which is manual focus with an AF.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
07-28-2011, 02:32 PM
|
| |
I second that opinion. They appear to last at least as long if not longer. NICE. Plus a car charger is an added bonus. (And if you are on a road trip and forget the house charger... the unit does that also.)
I had bought one additional Pentax battery when I got the K-R last November. It cost close to $40.00. I felt it would be nice to have a few others because two is usually enough.. .but that one time you run out of juice you will not be amused.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
06-23-2011, 11:54 AM
|
| |
I respect that you have stated your opinion and you have the right to have that opinion. However, just because it is your opinion does not make it automatically correct. (Regardless of how many times it is repeated in every thread about the subject.)
The fact remains that a DSLR that sets too low of a shutter speed on a regular basis with a flash has a bug or was poorly designed. That is my opinion and I have a right to that opinion. If you want to call me a names then be my guest. It won't remove the fact that the K-R often selects too slow of a shutter speed.
Here is an easier concept: if multiple people perceive something as a problem then regardless of the opinion of other people the fact remains that there is a problem. Calling them noobs and repeatedly telling them they are using their camera wrong is not an intelligent argument.
You'll also notice that the old SLR used 1/60 (and even later automatic SLR) didn't "intelligently" decide to lower the speed down to a slower shutter like 1/8 or 1/4 because that would not be very intelligent. Just like it isn't a good idea on a DSLR when a flash is used.
Hopefully they will fix this bug with a firmware update.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
06-23-2011, 08:18 AM
|
| |
There is a definite issue or bug with this camera model. It is not a good design goal for a camera to default to pretending it doesn't have a flash when one is attached and ready to be used. This problem is not quite that bad, but it is close. Others have mentioned in similar threads that most models in the Pentax line don't have this problem. Someone even compared his other Pentax camera to the K-R in the same light situations and discovered that the K-R often choose a shutter speed 1 or 2 stops slower than the other camera. (Confirming this problem.)
Years ago with film DSLR if you put on a "dedicated" flash the shutter would normally auto-set itself to 1/60 of a second and you would use a certain f-stop with the flash. They didn't drop down to 1/4 of a second because the camera was being used in low light. (You know... the very reason you attached a flash in the first place.) After more automatic cameras came out the camera would use 1/60 and also set the aperture. Now apparently we seem to have gone backwards in time and functionality. Even worse is when a cheap camera will give someone better pictures without needing to manually set everything when they use a flash. (I have a hard time explaining to my wife why she gets crappy pictures with an expensive camera when her cheap 5 year old camera will give her better pictures when using a flash with both.)
I've noticed that on this forum a lot of people will jump in and defend Pentax when anyone mentions this issue. They tell you that you should always manually pick your settings. But there are probably just as many people that agree that this is a bug. There is nothing wrong with expecting a camera to work properly in low light with a flash attached while setting the camera on the full auto setting. (And I will define "properly" as meaning that it will give you an acceptable picture a majority of the time instead of only sometimes by accident.) While I do happen to agree that if you want a certain type of result you need to set the camera manually, I don't agree that you should always need to set anything.
Personally it isn't a big deal with me since I've been using SLR cameras for almost 40 years. But my wife hates the need to put the camera on anything other than fully auto. I agree with her opinion; she should be able to leave it on fully auto when she attaches the flash and still get good pictures of children playing at school. (She is a teacher.) I've had to explain to her that there is a bug with this camera and she can either adjust it manually or we can buy her another Pentax model such as the K-X. (Which would be fine with me... getting another body is never bad.)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
06-20-2011, 11:27 PM
|
| |
Here is a comparison of 4 shots using firmware 1.10. Sorry I didn't do it exactly the same with 1.01 so I can't show that. But I think this shows what we wanted to see.
Lens = 50mm using Av with lens at f1.4. These shots are zoomed in a bit to more easily show the differences. The 45 degree chart is printed on WHITE paper. I didn't do any balancing. (Just AWB and TUNGSTEN.)
On left is AWB with Fine Tuning Disabled and then at -10 (Top then bottom)
On Right is WB = Tungsten with Fine Tuning Disabled and then at -10 (SUMMARY: it is better to set it to tungsten and fine tuning to -10.)
SIDE NOTE: I have a UV bulb made for reptiles for my Parrot cages. When changing from AWB to Tungsten around that light you didn't really see any dramatic changes with 1.01. NOW with 1.10 everything goes VERY blue. They definitely did more than just the GPS changes.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
06-20-2011, 09:40 PM
|
| |
Since the 1.10 is now on Pentax Japan, I went ahead and flashed my K-R.
No problems so far.... did see the GPS menu.
Am now testing FF with my 50mm F1.4. Preliminary tests indicate that it MIGHT be slightly better. But that could be placebo. I need to compare to shots I took yesterday then I'll know for sure.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
06-20-2011, 08:57 PM
|
| |
Based on how they loudly they announced that there was a problem it might possible that Pentax would stealthily slip a fix into the next major firmware update without any type of announcement.
In other words Pentax wouldn't want to announce fixing a problem to customers that never knew that any problem existed.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
06-20-2011, 12:52 PM
|
| |
OH nice catch with the firmware. I downloaded the old 1.01 and this "1.10" versions and verified that the files are truly different: The CRC checksums are different so it is definitely a different file. So now we just have to wait either for an official announcement OR somebody brave enough to try it. I'm not brave enough... I'm a wimp. But I will do a hex compare and see if I can narrow down the difference.
I did a few minutes of daylight testing (with the 1.01 firmware.) The FF is not as bad... but at full f1.4 the problem still seems to exist slightly. Even with a fine tune of "-10".
==========
EDIT: The header in the new file definitely says "Version 1.10 for K-R" where the old one said "Version 1.01 for K-R". Plus the readme says: "Updatable models
K-r digital SLR cameras running Firmware Ver. 1.00/1.01."
So I'm fairly certain this is a legit update. But I'm still not brave enough... I don't want a bricked camera body.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
06-19-2011, 09:30 PM
|
| |
I did some FF testing today with my camera. I've been wondering how far off it might be. I am testing with a 45 degree focus chart with a mixture of tungsten from ceiling flood lights and full spectrum lighting from a copy stand light.
With my "kit" lens I never really had any FF problem; but then at 55mm it is using f5.6 and that pretty much "hides" any FF problem.
With a 50mm @ f1.4 the problem persists and changing the camera fine tuning to "-10" moves the FF from about 6mm FF to about 2mm FF. That helps a lot to hide the problem. Apparently I would need a fine tuning of about -12 to -14 to get things optimal. Perhaps they could change the firmware to allow more than plus/minus 10?
I also verified that "live" is almost perfect. I need to turn off the fine tuning if I use live or it is BF by 4mm or so. But if "live" can be almost exactly perfect then there really should not be any reason a firmware fix can't be released to solve this.
SIDE NOTE: I started doing this testing because I'm going to get a 90mm Macro lens and even though I'll be using manual focus I wanted to know how far off the focus "beep" confirmation would be.
QUESTION: Does anyone know if there is definitive proof that the FF is seen in tungsten and/or "mixture" lighting ONLY? I am going to do some daylight testing anyway just for my own peace of mind.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
05-30-2011, 12:00 AM
|
| |
I just recently bought a 50mm f1.4 FA lens. I was seriously considering a manual focus, but decided to go ahead an pay the extra because the camera is also used by my wife. She is a school teacher who generally would NEVER use the lens if it was only manual focus. Within one week of having the new lens she has mentioned that she is completely amazed at how well it works in really low light. (Part of that is the K-R at enhanced ISO... but she doesn't know that.)
I think that this lens can autofocus in much lower light than many people think. I am impressed. I haven't done a band gig yet but I suspect that I might use auto focus a lot more than I thought. I will use manual focus when I use a tripod and I'm trying for some really artsy-fartsy shots. But for walking around band shots with a monopod I will expect myself to probably end up using auto focus a lot.
NOTE: I also bought one of the third party split focusing screens. (One of the $25.00 ones available on Amazon.) Having the split focus screen is basically almost a requirement if you plan on using manual focus. You "can" do it with the stock focusing screen... but my old man eyes need something better.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-17-2011, 11:55 PM
|
| |
My first post. (Other than the "welcome" post.)
Here is a quick Depth of field study: (Look at the WOOD as well as the lego figures.)
Use the left and right buttons to go from the f1.6 to f11. (f1.4 and f16 were blurry and I didn't do f22.0...)
http://keithlm.smugmug.com/Photography/New-50mm-f14/17117444_phvdjP
I don't think it is too bad for the first 15 minutes of using my new lens, hand held with a backlight. I must say that I'm impressed with these new DSLR cameras. Back in the day, when dinosaurs roamed, with a film camera that kind of backlight would have been a headache.
NOTE: I will probably redo these shots with a tripod and a remote shutter to make sure nothing moves. I'll set up a photo-tent so the illumination is uniform; no backlighting. I'll go from 1.4 up to 22.0 in whole step increments.
BTW: here is my parrot at f1.4: (The feathers by her eye are RAZOR sharp. She's a ham so I take a lot of pics of her. Ignore the icky neck where new feathers are growing in. Far enough back beyond the plane of her eyes it is out of focus. :-)
Not bad for one first pics of her with the new lens. Actually I don't like the composition, it is kind of "too rough" but it definitely jumps out at you.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
05-17-2011, 11:46 PM
|
| |
Howdy all.
had a K1000 back from the early 80's. Worked in a camera store. (Inkley's Photo in Layton Utah.) We took studio photo's and weddings with medium format cameras back then. It was work so I didn't really enjoy it as a hobby too much.
I have ignored DSLR and digital for years waiting for things to become mature enough.
My wife, a schoolteacher, has gone through 3 or 4 point and shots and one day she said to me "I'm tired of these little cameras they don't do what I want. We should buy a REAL camera. What do you think?"
Well... that was good enough for me... so I bought her a K-R with 18-55 and 55-300 kit lenses. And I have bought a 50mm FA f1.4 for myself. (Well okay for her too. She has friends that do concerts and wants to do some concert pictures without a flash.)
|
