|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-10-2016, 12:24 PM
|
| |
1) No
2) No
Definitely take it back
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-08-2016, 03:49 AM
|
| |
There is an app called AppDelete which has worked pretty well for me. http://www.reggieashworth.com/appdelete
Moving an unwanted app into trash works well enough most of the time, but AppDelete will also find associated files that just moving an app into trash leaves behind.
It also has an option to search for bits left behind from previous uninstalls and lets you decide which you want to delete.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-11-2016, 01:11 PM
|
| |
Keep it light and simple - you'll have enough to do with two young children in tow. Just take the MX-1.
If you're determined to take the K-30 then just stick on the 18-135. As others have said, you're not likely to have much time to swap lenses.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Compact Cameras
01-11-2016, 12:27 PM
|
| |
Maybe a touch on the large size, but the MX-1 is a good performer. You should be able to find a good used one in your price range.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-11-2016, 12:13 PM
|
| |
I had the 18-135 and changed it for a 16-85.
The 18-135 has a very useful range and I was quite satisfied with the image quality I got from it. But the 16-85 is a sharper lens and I find the extra 2mm at the wide end more useful than the 50mm I lose at the long end of the range. It spends more time on my camera than any other lens.
My vote goes for the 16-85, but you won't go far wrong with either.
A sample picture from the 16-85 + K-3 below, followed by another from the 18-135 + K5 iis (random choices, unedited straight out of camera)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-26-2015, 01:47 PM
|
| |
I've had both and have to agree - the 16-85 is absolutely worth the extra
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-26-2015, 06:06 AM
|
| |
I agree. Zooms are fine. The DA* zooms are superb and others like the 20-40 and 16-85 are (in my experience) very good, but super zooms are never likely to be in the same ball park.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-26-2015, 03:04 AM
|
| |
The 18-270 is not renowned for being sharp. SMC Pentax-DA 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 ED SDM Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
But if it's that bad perhaps you just have a poor copy of that lens and need to get it exchanged.
The K-3 is capable of good sharp images, but (like any camera) it needs to be paired with a good lens if you want to get the best out of it. Go to a good camera shop and test something like a DA*300 to see the difference.
Whilst being very versatile, a super zoom lens is always a compromise in image quality. If you don't want to swap lenses why not consider a shorter zoom and crop images where necessary? You have plenty of cropping potential with the K-3. The 18-135 is a step up in sharpness (I had one and found it was a great general purpose lens), but changed that for a 16-85 which is sharper again. It's not often I miss the extra range above 85 for general purpose shooting.
But if you're using the lens mainly for motor sport and air shows then you're likely to be better off getting a longer and faster lens - a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 is just one example worth considering.
If image quality is one of your main criteria, then there's really no alternative to carrying around at least two lenses or two cameras if you need to cover a large 'zoom' range.
At motor sport events and air shows I'll often carry the K-3 with either a Pentax 60-250 f4 or Sigma 100-300 f4, and carry a large sensor compact (small and light and easily accessible from a belt bag) for the closer shots.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-10-2015, 01:26 PM
|
| |
Click on the image and then scroll down to the specifications . . . . . . . !
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-04-2015, 09:05 AM
|
| |
I have the 15, 20-40 and 16-85. As WPRESTO has said, the 16-85 has exceeded my expectations.
If you only want to take one lens then the 16-85 will certainly be the most versatile and I doubt the image quality will disappoint.
If size and weight are an issue then the 20-40 is a great choice.
If you take just the 15 for the wider angle then that may be a bit limiting at times.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-25-2015, 08:17 AM
|
| |
I have both the 16-85 and the 20-40.
Both great lenses, and I'm particularly impressed with the 16-85.
The 20-40 has the advantage of being a Limited lens with absolutely super build quality. It just feels right and is a pleasure to use. Smaller, lighter and less conspicuous with great image quality.
The 16-85 has a very useful and usable range and image quality is not very far behind the 20-40, if at all. It's a slower lens, but that's not caused me any problems so far.
I did have a Sigma 17-50 at one time. Whilst it was a good lens I much prefer both the 20-40 and 16-85 for reasons of size, weight and picture quality.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
09-18-2015, 12:13 AM
|
| |
18-135 - Decent image quality and a very useful range. A good general purpose lens.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-12-2015, 11:40 PM
|
| |
Does your household insurance cover accidental damage? If so then you may have a claim there.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-24-2015, 01:50 PM
|
| |
I'm sorry to hear you've got a problem with your K-3, but it does get pretty wet on the Maid of the Mist. I don't mind taking my K-3 out on a rainy day and have never had any problems, but I wouldn't want to tempt fate there.
The Pentax is classed as weather resistant/sealed, not waterproof.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-12-2015, 12:32 AM
|
| |
I would go for something like a k-50 to start with. With some scene modes as well as the ability to have semi auto settings right through to full manual it will be a good learning tool with the ability to take good photo's. Once you have mastered that you'll have a much better idea what suits your needs, and you can then maybe trade up to a k-3 (or whatever the equivalent is at the time).
If you want sharp pictures then it's generally worth investing in good quality lenses. They will last a lifetime and outlast several camera bodies. But start with a good general purpose lens such as the 18-135 which is a nice lens with a very useful range, instead of the standard kit lens. This will give you better opportunity to learn what sort of focal lengths you like to use. The 50mm F1.8 is a good idea too (although I would prefer the wider 35mm F2.4 myself).
After a couple of years using that kind of kit you'll have a much better idea how you want to develop your system in the future.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
08-06-2015, 06:20 AM
|
| |
K-3 will be a good choice, and maybe even a K-5 ii s if you want to keep costs down and you can find one.
I would hold off on the full frame Pentax for the time being
- firstly wait for it to come out and see what's good, bad or indifferent about it (fingers crossed it'll all be good)
- secondly, wait for the early adopters to report back what they find about the camera
- thirdly, wait for any initial issues to be discovered and fixed (there's always something!)
- finally, wait for the initial price drop after the early adopters have bought.
The DA* 60-250 is a great lens on APSC. The autofocus can be a little slow, but it's not bad by any means. I find it quite useable for motor sport. I believe I've seen somewhere that it will work on Full Frame, but don't quote me on that. Against that the 70-200 is a faster lens, but it is a lot heavier.
Add a 1.4x pentax rear converter if you might want the extra reach without wanting to take a bigger heavier lens along.
It might also be worth looking at the 150-450 instead of or as well as the above for wildlife photography.
I don't know about the DA* 16-50, but it may well be worth considering the 16-85 as well. I'm very pleased with mine. Although it's not as fast, reports I've seen suggest it's comparable to the 16-50 for image quality.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-30-2015, 02:10 PM
|
| |
Sorry to hear you've been unlucky with yours. I hope the next one works out ok. If you get a decent copy I think you'll probably enjoy using it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-30-2015, 12:26 PM
|
| |
No problems with mine - I'm very pleased with it so far. It's spent more time on my camera than any other lens since I had it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
07-19-2015, 01:57 PM
|
| |
Thank you for a really interesting post :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
07-19-2015, 05:53 AM
|
| |
I'm pretty sure you can just install an older version. I've not done it myself but have heard of others who have done so when they've had problems with an update.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
07-18-2015, 11:10 PM
|
| |
Does it auto power off during an update? After all, it's the firmware that gives the auto power off instruction and during an update that must be disabled while it's being replaced.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-28-2015, 12:31 AM
|
| |
I think retaining some convergence is absolutely fine and does look more natural to the eye. As Adam says, it's just the nature of the game with a wide lens and I have no problem with leaving it as shot. But equally, if it makes the image look more pleasing then I'm just as happy to straighten things up but still retaining some convergence.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-23-2015, 05:17 AM
|
| |
You've picked up the lack of quick shift and metal mount. The only other thing would be the lens hood, but they are available very cheaply on ebay.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
06-23-2015, 12:19 AM
|
| |
As a stop-gap until Apple release an update, why not shoot in RAW+ and use the JPGs for reviewing in Preview. If you're concerned about the extra space taken on the memory card you could always select one of the lower quality JPG options.
As a plus, it's much faster running through JPGs than RAW images in Preview.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
06-22-2015, 12:21 AM
|
| |
I had a Sigma 18-200 with a Pentax K-x a few years ago. It was a useful carry everywhere kind of lens, but I was never really totally satisfied with the image quality from it. Although that could equally well be to do with my lack of skill :) More recently I've had an 18-135 paired with a K-5iis and a K-3. Different camera bodies, I know - but I think the 18-135 is definitely superior to the Sigma 18-200. Also WR which is handy at times.
I don't know what more recent Sigma 18-200 lenses are like.
I'll admit to having exchanged the 18-135 for a 16-85 recently because I find the wider angle at the short end more useful. I feel the 16-85 is another step up in image quality again, but I do wonder if there'll be times when I miss the gap between 85 & 135. I guess I'll just have to crop a bit harder or carry the 60-250 with me more often.
|
