|
Forum: Sold Items
12-21-2011, 09:27 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Sold Items
12-21-2011, 09:27 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-21-2011, 10:28 AM
|
| |
bimjo, DOF has nothing to do with what i am referring to, though too wide open or too stopped down will give overly soft images depending on the lens. but these were blatantly not focus or DOF related. just plain moosh. (some maybe heavily front focused, but the image did not show enough to determine that.
i am bummed i cant find those pictures now (there are so many weekly contest threads to sift through).
i am picky about my lenses though so i like my "sharp wide open" glass. but also am happy to stop down to get the results. or handle the image in photoshop to get what i desire.
but anyways guys a good discussion but i feel the error was mine in seeing what i did and feeling that those images MIGHT indicate what the camera was capable of.
looking more now i see how silly i was to assume such a thing.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-21-2011, 10:10 AM
|
| |
i am more than aware of old glass being more than acceptable, you read more into it as happens far to often in forums.
i said old or low quality glass, and they do go hand in hand. but so does old and sharp.
i own my helios 44-2 f/2 along with some older stuff i have not touched in years.
anyways i am happy to continue conversing about quality glass and the K-5 but after sitting here looking (instead of working haha) i feel that what i was seeing was not indicitive of the true K-5 abilities.
now i jsut wish a local shop would carry one but thats like asking them to carry any decent hardware at all... pfpfpf - we cna get it for you but we dont stock it... yeah great,, thanks, i will buy it from amazon and have it here tomorrow with my amazon prime acount.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-21-2011, 09:46 AM
|
| |
the 28-75 and 17-50 are a picky couple of lenses, both of which i have owned, both of which had to be sent in for recalibration.
sharp ? no, i have never owned a sharp copy of either,. acceptable given the f/2.8 and price point.. maybe. but they required heavy post processing.
have i seen images posted that show just brutally sharp copies, oh yes, yes indeed.
but i have given up on those as i dont need to buy more glass and have to send it in for calibration right out of the box.
plus the whiney gear driven sounding focusing motor is just annoying.
all that being said i am feeling quite foolish as i can not find the threads, here at work, that i was referring to when i wrote this (from home) but it was several of the weekly contest threads and i was floored by the lack of sharp images.
but looking through the threads now i am seeing plenty of good quality images.
so this thread for all intents and purposes can go away. and i will simply chaulk it up as user taste or error or just old glass.
it really did remind me of old or low quality glass; how they are just mooshy and not sharp.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-21-2011, 06:32 AM
|
| |
Jolepp that is about the most accurate and honest statement about photography i have heard for a long time.
i 100% whole heartedly agree!
and my style of photography is one that i consider to be more artsy than anything because my end result is very much not how the camera took it.
i apply photo styles with alienskin plug ins in photoshop so... i like my retro looking images. but i like them sharp when the style warrants.
that being said i will point out a thread or two, and i think the images i am referring to will point themselves out, and again i am not nitpicking or pointing fingers i am only sighting examples.
p.s. - crap running late for work, will post links when i am in the office.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-21-2011, 06:02 AM
|
| |
i am a long time canon user who is looking for something new and exciting.
so i see the k-5 and just blown away by the high iso performance.
anyways i am looking through the forums and am noticing something disturbing to me.
a good many of the pictures being posted here are just flat out soft and out of focus.
i dont need to point out people or threads and i wont, and decent photographer sees them here all the time, i am not here to troll or point a finger at someones work and say it's poopy, but i am not going to lie when i say i am backing away from Pentax because of these shots.
these are not simply out of focus but downright soft and mooshy. its so obvious that i personally would never, could never post a shot like these anywhere and be proud.
i infact have only posted shots like that to prove a cameras focusing is broken (or lens)
they appear out of focus but there is no visible front or back focusing. so i am left with little choice but to say the pentax k-5 produces horribly soft images,,,,
OR
far far too many people here are using old lenses that to not belong on the K-5 because they do not have the resolving power to produce sharp images. (i would believe that before the latter)
i am in love with the K-5's high iso performance compared to canon, and even nikon but so many images (easily seen in the weekly photo contest threads) are so soooo blurry to me i have to wonder what people are doing during the shoot and during post to feel that their images are in focus when they are not.
i take sharp pictures, day in and day out, be it faces, flowers or the moon with my canon USM, L and non USM lenses. and i am seeing only the occasional image out of the K-5 posted here that can even remotely match the sharpness i am getting from canon jpeg and raw files (processed in CS4 and 5)
i have to know, is this just user? error old glass? what ?
please provide your experienced insight as i have no issue switching platforms if it means an upgrade to iso performance, ergonomics, fps, etc.
also i have not researched much yet but what is the lens adaptability of the K series bodies ? ie; M42 no problem i see is no problem, K-Mount lenses require an adapter?? is nikon usable ? etc....
|
