|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-21-2023, 06:28 AM
|
| |
I was surprised to see the DA* 200 SDM on that list. I wonder if there is a PLM version of that lens in the works.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-24-2023, 05:02 AM
|
| |
Very good advice. Since I have started doing this rather than just deleting them, I find this has helped my technique considerably.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
02-05-2023, 04:03 PM
|
| |
Have you tried a call to Apple Support and speak to a live representative? No way of knowing for sure if they can resolve your problem but hopefully they can at least provide some help. The few times I called them, they were very helpful. There are two toll free numbers I have called them on (800) 275-2273 and (800) 692-7753. This is US based customer support so I do not know if these will work for you or if there is a different number for Canadian customers. It may be worth it for you to try. Supposedly if your computer is out of warranty there can be a charge, but I called a few times on systems that were out of warranty and was not charged for their support, especially if it involves iCloud. As others suggested I do not put my photos on the cloud. I keep them backed up on an external SSD. I was considering upping my iCloud storage from the current 500GB to 2 TB and backing up my photos to iCloud but after seeing what you are going through I'll save my money and just keep backing up my photos to the SSD. Good Luck, I hope you find a solution.
|
|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
11-30-2022, 02:29 PM
|
| |
About 6 years ago my HD DA 40 Limited focus ring froze up one week after the warranty expired. I sent it to Precision for repair hoping they would still perform a warranty repair. They would not repair the lens under warranty. When I checked the sales receipt I noticed I did get the New Leaf extended warranty. I called New leaf for warranty support. They told me they would contact Precision to process a warranty repair. The phone contact at New Leaf was friendly and kept me updated on the warranty repair status. Long story short the lens was repaired at no cost to me. New Leaf even called me back after I received the lens to ensure the repair was completed to my satisfaction.
So my experience with New Leaf was very positive but, that was six years ago. Hopefully their customer service remains as good as it was when I contacted them.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-28-2022, 06:41 PM
|
| |
I would be very hesitant to go for the supposedly new 17-70. Best to go straight to the 16-85 as others have also suggested. You will find this is a much better lens than the 17-70. I do not know what the pricing for a new 16-85 is in Australia but at the 3 major retailers in the US it is on sale so you may also be seeing discounts in Australia retailers. So, this may be a good time to treat yourself to it. Mine is by far my most used lens.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-28-2022, 05:46 AM
|
| |
The 17-70 cannot be converted to screw drive. It is SDM only. The lens is discontinued and can only be bought used as far as I know. I faced the same dilemma as you about 3 years ago, the SDM on mine failed completely. This is a well documented issue with this lens. Like you, I really liked the image quality of this lens when it worked. Unfortunately I found it unusable as a manual focus lens due to the very loose and short throw of the focus ring. That left me at the time, and you now with 3 options.
1. Have the lens repaired
2. Buy a used one, they periodically come up for sale at prices lower than quoted repair cost.
3. Replace it with something else. In my case I found a used 16-85 at a reasonable cost in like new condition. Personally I find the 16-85 better in every way except it doesn't have the constant f 4 aperture. It is sharper, has better build quality and has a reliable autofocus motor.
If I were in your position, since you already have 2 good alternative lenses I would probably be satisfied with what you already have. If you want or need to replace it, I would recommend either the 18-135 or the 16-85 after considering which better fits your needs.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-19-2022, 02:41 PM
|
| |
Normally I would join the others who recommended the DA 16-85, but you have that range covered with some very fine limited lenses. The 16-85 is a great one lens solution, which I highly recommend, but after reading your responses to everyone, my 2 cents worth of suggestion would be to go for the 100 Macro WR. It is very sharp and fits very nicely with your Limited lens collection.
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
11-08-2022, 06:22 PM
|
| |
That is a really cool looking bird. Nice shot!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-06-2022, 06:20 PM
|
| |
This is exactly why I am keeping mine. f2.8 in a telephoto is really nice to have.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-11-2022, 06:02 AM
|
| |
I look at this lens as something I would like to have but can't quite justify buying. I have the DA15, 21, 35macro and 40 Limiteds and the HD DA 16-85 lenses. The 16-85 is my go to when I want a one lens option and the 15, 21 and 40 are my go to lenses when I want to keep things compact. What I am pondering: what would the 20-40 limited add that I don't already have?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-27-2022, 07:10 AM
|
| |
From your description it looks more like a wobbly inner barrel than a loose zoom. I do not know if there is a fix for it, it just seems to occur with certain lenses. I have DA 17-70 SDM and HD 55-300 zooms and both have inner barrels that became wobbly and loose over time even though I handled them carefully and never bumped them. More recently I replaced them with the DA 16-85 and 55-300 PLM zooms. Neither one of them have any inner barrel wobble, sag or looseness even though I have used them much longer and under more demanding conditions than their two predecessors which I don't use anymore.It just seems some lenses are more prone to this than others. I also have a DA 70 Limited which I bought used. It also has a loose wobbly inner barrel but It does not appear to have any adverse impact on image quality.
A loose zoom would exhibit what is referred to as zoom creep where the lens barrel will extend outward from a fully retracted position to a fully extended position on its own especially when the camera is held with the lens pointed down. This issue did affect the 17-70 SDM but not any of my other zoom lenses. Reading lens reviews this can be a common issue with some zooms.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-70 & KF
07-04-2022, 05:48 PM
|
| |
This would be my recommendation. DA* 300. I have it and the 55-300 PLM. While I feel the 55-300 PLM is quite good up to about 270mm ( where it is still f5.6 or 5.8 ) it is not as sharp as the DA* 300 prime at 300mm, nor should you expect it to be. That is the reason for having a prime. Also I have the 1.4 TC and that extends the 300mm prime to 420 mm. Autofocus with my K-3 is not especially fast but it is good enough for photographing birds which is what I mostly use it for. Plus the in lens motor is quieter than any of the older FA zooms screwdrive.
|
|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
06-25-2022, 08:23 AM
|
| |
If what you are observing is hot pixels or bright colored dots on pictures especially when cropped, you can do a pixel mapping in the camera. I had an issue with brightly colored blue or red dots on pictures, especially when cropped on my K-5. I did the pixel mapping in the camera menu and it cleared up the problem completely.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-07-2022, 01:37 PM
|
| |
There is much emphasis on the PLM version having a much faster autofocus than the screwdrive versions. There is another thing you may want to consider is not just the speed of the autofocus but the noise level of the autofocus. I have both the HD 55-300 screwdrive version and the PLM version and since I got the PLM, I have been using only the PLM version on my K-3. Since I use it for photographing birds and wildlife autofocus is important that it not only be faster but quieter too. See the In Depth review of the PLM version on this forum. There is an you tube autofocus comparison between the HD version and the PLM version. This could help you decide which one you want to live with. Optically I find the PLM to be slightly sharper, but not significant enough that sharpness alone is a reason to upgrade.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-07-2022, 06:05 AM
|
| |
Glad to hear you had a nice trip. On my trip to Zion NP and Bryce Canyon, I used the 16-85 for the vast majority of my pictures and occasionally the older version 55-300. I am heading up to Acadia National Park in Maine in a few days. This thread gives me an opportunity to revisit my initial post, and see what others have recommended. for this trip. I will be taking my K-3 and 16-85 & 55-300 PLM zooms. I will also include the 35 Macro Limited for closeups of the flora we will see and I expect the 55-300 PLM will come in handy for bird life along the coast.
Nice pictures you got. I also would like to go back to Zion one day.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
04-22-2022, 02:51 PM
|
| |
I don't shoot at a speck in the sky. I will take shots when it is small in the sky but large enough that I can determine what kind of bird it is. I don't need it to be close enough that I can differentiate a Red Tailed Hawk from a Broad Winged Hawk but close enough that I can determine it is a mid sized Buteo Hawk. In my old film days I would not chance wasting film on distant subjects, but with digital I can shoot then crop and delete it if it is not satisfactory. About two thirds of pictures of distant BIF get deleted but a third are keepers. The deletes don't cost me anything which is better than forgoing the chance of some good pictures. Where I live I get good opportunities to get pictures of fall migrations beginning in October. So, I take advantage of it with what I have.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
04-22-2022, 05:47 AM
|
| |
I have encountered the same issue as the OP on my K-3 with both the 55-300 PLM and with the DA* 300 with and without the teleconverter. From my experience this statement hits the nail right on the head. I tried photographing raptors in flight and the target is usually very small and very distant against a featureless blue sky background. Both lenses have trouble focusing in this situation.I have had better luck using manual focus since the bird is typically in focus at infinity setting. In cases where the bird is lower and larger the autofocus with both lenses works much more reliably. I have been using only center autofocus, but after following this thread, I will try using more autofocus points and see if that helps.
|
|
Forum: Maintenance and Repair Articles
04-05-2022, 05:42 AM
|
| |
Thanks for posting this. I have only one F series lens; the 28mm f2.8 but fortunately my lens has a metal inner barrel and filter thread. I do have the FA version of the 50 mm f1.7 and it looks to have the same design filter thread as your F series version. My thought all along even before reading this post is that the plastic filter mount piece is fragile and so I avoided using filters on both my FA 50 f1.7 and also my DFA 100 macro WR. I don't know if the newer versions, especially the DFA use an improved plastic but my impression is they do not seem durable especially compared to my lenses with metal filter threads. Also, the fact that the filter part is easily removable by unscrewing just three screws would indicate to me that it is known to be easily damaged and therefore easily replaceable. I would really like to know if a replacement filter mount is an available part and if it can be bought. What you did is great but at my age and hand tremors I could not do what you did myself. Unscrewing the three screws and installing a new replacement filter mount is something I would be comfortable doing.
|
|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
03-26-2022, 10:33 AM
|
| |
This is an example of an ever increasing issue with exorbitant repair costs exceeding the cost of replacing the item. It seems to be happening with a lot of electronic items these days. I recently ended up trashing a 3 year old over the range microwave oven where the cost of the repair was actually more than buying an upgraded unit from the same manufacturer. What also bothers me is that they are charging a $58 fee for shipping the camera back. That is not right that they use this as an additional money maker. I would doubt that the cost of shipping by the most common shippers like Fedex or UPS is more than $20. This does not give me a good feeling about Precisions business practices even if they are a competent repair facility.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-24-2022, 05:43 PM
|
| |
I was at both parks back in 2019. The weather can be very different since Bryce Canyon is 8300 feet in elevation (colder) and Zion is down closer to (warmer or hotter) sea level. I had a K-3 and 16-85 and 55-300 (not PLM) as my kit. The vast majority of the time, the 16-85 was all I needed but it was nice to have the HD 55-300 for the occasional long shots. I plan on going back to both parks again and my kit will be the K-3 with the 16-85 and the 55-300 which is now the PLM version. These two lenses should give just about all you need. There almost no situations where I wished I had something wider than the 16-85, but if you can fit in the sigma or the 10-17 FE then certainly take it along. Enjoy your trip.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-09-2022, 02:15 PM
|
| |
I am sure the build quality of the 16-50 PLM is top grade but I have the 16-85 and the build quality is really very good for a mostly plastic construction lens. The zoom and focus rings operate smoothly and the lens barrel even fully extended has no wobble on my copy. Sharpness is really good, I cannot see where it is less sharp than any of my primes and I have some sharp primes, including SMC 35 Macro Limited and DFA 100 WR macro. I would certainly recommend the 16-85.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-26-2022, 07:27 PM
|
| |
In am still on the fence regarding upgrading from my K-3 original to the K-3iii. After seeing the review, I noticed they used the DA 16-85 which I was glad to see since my most used combo would go from K-3 original with DA 16-85 to K-3iii with the same DA 16-85. I would really like to know if I would get better overall performance with the same lens on a new K-3iii than I am getting with the K-3 I have. I am not at all disappointed with the performance of my combo but if I would see better performance with the K-3iii I would seriously consider the upgrade. Most important to be would be better low light performance, better autofocus performance (understanding it would not be faster than the lens already is) and improved sharpness with the new sensor and pixel shift.
If anyone has upgraded K-3 to K-3iii and using DA 16-85 on both I would appreciate any feedback as to whether the new camera would offer better performance in the areas I noted as important with the same lens being used. I do not have the $$$ to also upgrade the zoom to the new 16-50 PLM so the 16-85 will be my most used lens.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
02-21-2022, 11:32 AM
|
| |
After reading this post I took a look at 2 same photos that are on my older iMac (2010) running High Sierra with photos version 3.0 and my newer iMac (2019) running Monterey and photos version 7.0. I confirmed the change in focal length displayed. Both Pictures were taken on my K-3, one with the DA 40 Limited and one with the DA 70 Limited in 2019. On the older iMac the DA 40 showed the focal length as 40 and the DA 70 showed as 70 mm. On my newer system the photos were copied from a time machine backup of the old computer. So, they are the same photos. On the newer iMac the focal length of the picture taken with the DA 40 Limited is displayed as 60 and the focal length with the DA 70 limited is displayed as 105. So, there definitely was a change in how the focal length is presented that occurred sometime between Photos version 3.0 and Photos 7.0. I went on the iMac support site and tried to find anything on the support site but could not find how this setting can be modified to display the lens focal length instead of the 35 mm equivalent focal length. I could not find any documentation of this or how to change it. Apparently it displays the information provided from camera and the computer software choses whether to display the actual focal length of the lens or the 35 mm equivalent. At some point I will give Apple support a call and see if they can provide any insight into this. If I get anything useful, I will update this post. I also noticed that when I click on info all of my prime lenses which include Limited primes and DA* 200 & 300 identify the lenses but photos taken with my DA 16-85 and 55-300 PLM display "No Lens Information" but do display all the photo information including the 35 mm equivalent focal length.
I am fine with the 35 mm equivalent displayed with the primes but with the zooms I would rather have the true focal length of the lens when the picture taken displayed.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
02-15-2022, 03:52 PM
|
| |
Sorry to hear about your bad experience with the DA 16-85. I bought mine from KEH used in Like New Minus condition. At the time it was $250 less than a new one. Mine has been great and about the only thing I did not get vs. new was the original box. As for everything else I have a mix of lenses both new and used. I bought the high cost items such as DA* 300 used and camera bodies and less costly lenses new. My only duds were both bought new; HD DA 40 Limited which was repaired under extended warranty and a DA 17-70 SDM where the SDM motor died shortly after the warranty expired. I still have not decided on getting it fixed or not. As far as used lenses, I bought from KEH, Adorama and B&H. I have not had any issues with any of my used purchases, so I consider it a good way to get equipment.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-12-2022, 06:35 AM
|
| |
I would highly recommend the DA 16-85. I have a K-3 and typically shoot with high quality DA* and Limited primes. Once I upgraded my computer to a 4K iMac the higher resolution monitor helped me see which lenses provided the highest quality images. I was surprised how well the 16-85 compared with primes in the same focal length. Its only drawback is that it is a bit large and bulky, but its versatility and reliable autofocus more than make up for that.
|
