|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
01-04-2016, 08:53 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-02-2013, 03:53 AM
|
| |
Does anyone have any recommendations for a copy stand that is in production, is not too expensive, is reasonable quality, and is available in the UK?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-30-2013, 02:46 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-26-2013, 12:58 AM
|
| |
Thanks to everyone for their replies. It looks like the 100mm macro lens is the winner.
I had never heard of a copy stand before. Having just done a quick Google search, this seems to be an excellent idea, so thank you Not a Number. Anything in particular I should look out for, or avoid, when chosing one?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-25-2013, 10:06 AM
|
| |
I’m fairly new to DSLR cameras so excuse any ignorance I may show in the following question. I have tried to do a search on this subject but without success; if I have missed something again I am sorry – please point me in the right direction.
I am looking for a macro lens to photograph historic coins – specifically Roman Denarii, which are about 18mm in diameter, and silver in colour. Due to their age they tend to be badly worn, so the key attribute of any lens has to be sharpness; I do not want to lose what little definition remains in the coins. I intend to photograph indoors, using a tripod and natural light from a window to the side (to maximise shadows and hence improve the perception of the highs and lows on the faces of the coins)
Would a shorter focal length (eg the 35mm limited) give better or worse results than longer (eg 100mm DFA macro)? What are the relative advantages and disadvantages of each when it comes to shooting small items that do not move in a controlled environment?
I doubt I will be doing much insect shooting, so the longer closest focus distance of the 100mm is not an advantage. I do not use either focal length more than the other at present (using the kit lenses on my K-r) so please ignore the strengths and weaknesses of each lens for other purposes.
This will be my first prime.
Any ideas? |
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
02-23-2013, 07:18 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
02-28-2012, 02:21 AM
|
| |
Thanks. Unfortunately the Raynox adaptor you mention is for a 72mm filter to go on a 43mm lens - I need the opposite - a 43mm filter on a 72mm lens, and no-one seems to make these. I know that I can use a single adaptor with the snap-on mount, or I can use two adaptors. What I am wondering is - are there any particular advantages to either course of action?
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
02-26-2012, 02:22 PM
|
| |
What is the view on using a Raynox with a lens with a 72mm diameter such as the Sigma 18-250? Should I use two step down rings (as no-one seems to make a 72mm-43mm ring) to mount the Raynox in, or one step down ring to mount the Raynox and its spring loaded adaptor?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
02-13-2012, 12:25 PM
|
| |
There seems to be only one UK eBay shop selling them at the moment, eBay's item number is 320827342519. Their feedback isn't too bad at 99.6%. It might be worth giving it a try at only GBP8.90 with free postage. If it doesn't work you can always get your money back via eBay/PayPal. I'm going to give it a try now - if there are any problems I'll report back.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-11-2012, 08:43 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-10-2012, 09:03 AM
|
| |
I have ordered a Sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM for use as a travel lens on my K-r. I know that I cannot use both the OS on the lens and the IS on the camera at the same time; it has to be one or the other. The question is, which is better? |
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
12-02-2011, 12:11 PM
|
| |
What about the 50-200 kit lens? This is the same size (52mm) as the 18-55 - should I use the same hood?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-r
11-12-2011, 06:58 AM
|
| |
I have a K-r with the 18-55 and 50-200 kit lenses, and owned the Tamron 18-200 for about an hour. In that time I found that the autofocus was slow, noisy, and hunted a lot. Photos were not as sharp as either kit lens and the colours seemed somehow "flatter". I packed it up and sent it back for a refund.
The reviews for the 18-250s suggest that they are much better, but they are also a lot more expensive - so for the time being I am sticking with the kit lenses.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-23-2011, 03:15 AM
|
| |
Well, I've answered my own question. As I think I said earlier, the cost of the 18-250s was too much for me, so I ordered a Tamron 18-200. Picture quality is slightly worse and the autofocus is dreadful - it hunts backwards and forwards and backwards and forwards and backwards and forwards........................:mad:
Lens is being returned today. Thankyou UK Distance Selling Regulations!:)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-04-2011, 12:30 AM
|
| |
I mainly use smaller prints (6 x 4 inches).
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-03-2011, 12:44 AM
|
| |
Thanks to everyone for their input. The trouble is that the 18-250 is difficult to find second hand in the UK, and when it is available it is over twice the price of a new 18-200, and the new lens will come with a 3 year UK warranty (Sigma) or 5 year UK warranty (Tamron). Whilst I would love to be able to buy the more expensive lens, I am on a rather tight budget and simply cannot afford to do so, doubly so as I will have the risk of something going wrong. So, going back to the question, is the quality of a picture taken with an 18-200 better or worse than the same picture taken with the 18-55 or 50-200?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-02-2011, 02:15 PM
|
| |
I have recently bought a k-r with the 18-55 and 50-200 kit lenses, having previously only owned cheap compact cameras.
My problem is that I always (well it seems like always) have the wrong lens on the camera. I am nervous about changing lenses whilst out and about partly because of the risk of getting dust etc into the camera, and partly because I am clumsy and it is only a matter of time before I drop one or both lenses whilst doing so. I also sometime find it difficult carrying two lenses if I am out for a whole day and have to carry food and drink, and equipment for my disabled wife.
Sigma and Tamron both make 18-200 lenses which cover the same range as the two kit lenses and I could just about afford one of them. I have read any number of reviews of them, including those on this forum, but none of the reviews that I have found compare them to the kit lenses. In simple terms, if I buy one of these, will my picture quality be the same, better or worse than using the two kit lenses? If the same or better then I can justify buying one of them, but if not then I will have to continue to carry two lenses - I cannot justify spending what for me is a lot of money for the convenience of having a single lens if it results in a deterioration in picture quality.
I mainly use the camera for recording events such as holidays and days out rather than for purely "artistic" shots, although I would like to do more of the latter as I get better.
Any help will be much appreciated.
|
