|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-03-2014, 03:07 PM
|
| |
Makes sense. Technically you bought LNIB. New means never-previously-sold. Mint is different. My boxes are good but do show foxing. They've been in the back of a shop getting moved about for over a decade.
I got obsessed with the bags and wanted silver. Thus I had a set of mint black, then a set of mint silver and then sold those to fund this set of new. I'm done. I am looking forward to having a FF body to mount them on.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-03-2014, 02:46 PM
|
| |
New? Where from and how much? Actually new is essentially unobtanium. I'd be interested in knowing how yours compares to mine in terms of paperwork and packaging.
Did you get the colored bag? Mine are all the first run so I have the red, green and brown bags too.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-03-2014, 02:32 PM
|
| |
Your plan is optimistic. LNIB versions for cheap are rare.
I bought brand-new MIJ versions last year (not like-new, new-old-stock). I paid a small premium but they're brand-new. I can't imagine anyone seeing prices increase on the FA's and not adjusting the value of the 'old' FA's up. With minor changes unless they completely eliminate the CA there won't be much to choose.
Of course the new FA's won't be MIJ either most likely.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-04-2013, 02:59 PM
|
| |
You're right - I made a mistake.
When the original Limiteds were made available - the 43 - it was only in Silver. The 31 was the last of the three to hit the market and by the time it did they were releasing in both colors. The box of my 31 reflects that.
I will try to post some photos later. I had to do it late last night so the light is bad. We'll see how it turns out.
I don't think mine are super-early for colored-bag versions. It was the newness that did it for me.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-03-2013, 06:27 PM
|
| |
Probably. Mines old enough to fit my requirements though and that's all I need. It's a great lens and will likely be my 'normal' on any full-frame Pentax I buy in future.
I'd love them to build a FA24 limited (around a new design) to celebrate the release of full-frame sensors. I can't help thinking the limiteds remain in production so that when that time comes they have a reasonable offering.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-03-2013, 10:16 AM
|
| |
Thanks.
I shoot the K-01 like a rangefinder. I only shoot primes on all my cameras and though I'd like something wider, 46mm equivalent is perfectly workable with a little effort.
If I'd been open to sub-full-frame lenses I would have been tempted by the Nikon 1, for it's insane speed, or the NEX, which offers similar quality to the Pentax but has viewfinder options. They lost that sale due to my determination to make my investments in glass last as long as possible. Hopefully forever. The Limiteds do that.
I'd bet my FA77 is the equal of the 85. Compared to my Nikkor 85 1.4 it's close and that's an unbelievable lens. I'm lucky enough to have a Nikkor 200mm f2 as well for reference. That's one of the best lenses I've ever handled on any system. You have to go that far, or to a Leica Summicron, to see a clear improvement at wide apertures without peeping.
In my experience, and not reflected in the pricing on the used market, the 77 is the best lens, the 43 second and the 31 third. That's accounting for all apertures.
Wide open the 43 isn't as good as the other two and the 77 has an unfair advantage as its focal length emphasizes the bokeh which makes the in-focus areas appear sharper by comparison. The 31 is happier wide-open than the 43 and has better bokeh. Stopped down a touch and the 43 really sings.
They're all great though. Very nice to handle and shoot. Much more like find manual lenses than most plastic AF stuff. Reminiscent of Leica and Nikkor's AF-D and manuals in my opinion.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-03-2013, 10:05 AM
|
| |
Actually I think I'm done for a bit. I don't want to spend money on any non-full-frame glass on any system (I shoot a few). It seems very short-term. I'm not keen on buying anything 'disposable' which is one reason I didn't buy a Sony RX1. However great it is it's a paperweight in a couple of years (not because it'll 'go bad', more that it's slow and that's frustrating.).
My next purchases in the lens space will be Leica. I'm also waiting for a good, fast, AF 'normal' for Nikon. With that in hand I'll have my Leica, my carry-camera and my 35mm kit where I want them. Done. Just shooting from then until a compact, fast, digital, MF hits the market.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-03-2013, 08:58 AM
|
| |
As I understand it the originals were all silver. The original 43 was supposed to be premium and chrome fits that. The success of the 43 lead to a Leica mount version and then the 77 and finally 31. When the lenses became more widely available the black finish appeared - I think concurrently with the lenses being made available outside Japan.
Now given more people's preference for black the silvers are harder to find. Obviously they're also a little more expensive to produce.
Black versions with the early colored bags don't exist and you can tell how early a silver MIJ version is by the box. If it says 'silver' the blacks were available. If not it was still silver only.
My serials are all below 2,000. I don't know where they started. Often it's not zero.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-02-2013, 07:38 PM
|
| |
Phil - I thought about that. I wasn't sure what to show though. Other than being mint there's nothing to show is there? Personally I found the packaging interesting as now I know exactly what shipped from the factory and how it was arranged.
Let me know if there's a way to make it work. I'd be happy to oblige. Tell me what you want to see.
I will likely obscure the serials if I do post. I would hate someone to steal the images and claim to be selling this kit, or working some other angle I can't conceive of.
I can do this tomorrow night, it's late where I am.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-02-2013, 06:40 PM
|
| |
Yes. Very lucky. Once-in-a-lifetime really. Part of me says I should keep them and never touch them but I bought them to shoot and that's what I'll do.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-02-2013, 06:33 PM
|
| |
I bought a K-01 to replace my Canon G1-X which was stolen just before Christmas.
My thinking was that bodies are disposable and lenses last. I wanted a carry-around camera with the highest quality possible and lenses that would last a decade or more. My options were not limited by cost but I didn't want to get anything too large. The Sony NEX and Nikon 1 made the shortlist along with Pentax. I went with the K-01 because:
- The sensor competes with everything current in APS-C and below and betters most of it.
- Pentax Limited lenses are compact, high quality and full-frame. Having an aperture ring means they can be adapted to almost anything.
So I got my K-01 in black and started looking for lenses.
I soon learned that the new versions were assembled in Vietnam and, though I'm sure they're great, I wanted the Japanese versions. That meant buying used and brought me here.
First I bought the 43 and 77 in black. They were great. They looked nice but I had trouble finding a Japanese 31 in black. I could see a bunch in silver though. I work in design and convinced myself silver was going to look better and wear better, so I sold my black versions a couple of weeks after getting them and started buying silver.
Again I got the 43 and 77 pretty fast. This time I went for low serial numbers with colored bags. The 77 didn't have it's box and paperwork though so my set wasn't perfect. I scoured the web for a 31 in a red bag. The only place I found them was in Japan and they were expensive. I was getting ready to buy when....
Wow.
I found all three lenses. Early serials. Colored bags. Boxes and paperwork. Brand new.
It was crazy. A shop had them and had never sold them. They'd never been opened. They were asking a little more than retail. I bought them all.
The last one arrived yesterday. I now have maybe the only set of 100% new FA limited, MIJ lenses with early serials and colored bags in the world. I intend to use them and not just sit them in a corner to gather dust.
However, if anyone here has questions, let me know. One interesting thing for buyers to note is that my early versions have no 'Silver' or 'Black' written on the boxes - obviously because the black versions only appeared later. However people passing off 'Frankenstein' arrangements of lenses, bags and boxes probably don't know that so it's something to look out for.
Anyway - I'm thrilled. I have exactly what I wanted. A cheap, high-quality digital back and a set of really good lenses.
I'm happy to add a Pentax rig to my camera collection.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
03-19-2013, 08:19 AM
|
| |
I disagree. The camera isn't capable of optimizing exposure 90% of the time.
I shoot computationally. I.e., I recognize that RAW files are not negatives and that the old idea that the camera delivered a negative, and the computer developed a print, is wrong.
That means I'm aware of my cameras ability to amplify signals in the analog domain and where it switches to digital. Digital amplification can be handled far better in a computer than in the camera body. That limits the ISO I'm willing to use. In short - lifting shadows on an 800 ISO shot can produce a better result than shooting at ISO 3200 because in a computer I can use slow, floating point, calculations the camera doesn't.
(That also means I don't use Lightroom or Aperture for this stuff - where they use crude calculations in order to deliver speed and 'sliders'.)
That all means that often I'm exposing for highlights, at lower ISO than the camera thinks is right, in order to deliver a dark RAW file which I then lift afterwards. This gives me a better, less noisy, cleaner result. It's a product of treating the camera as a digital device and not pretending it's a film body.
If I let the camera decide exposures for me it'd damage my images. The camera could produce the same image I can but it uses the $50 processor in the body instead of the $500 processor in my Mac. I can use a range of programs and optimize the exposure via trial and error on a large screen at any level of zoom.
In camera digital amplification is cruddy. I avoid it at all costs and that's exactly what happens as soon as you reach a light level where your camera needs to leave its ISOless range. (Google ISOless if that makes no sense).
Finally - and simply - Av assumes I am prepared to compromise my shutter speed for my depth of field. Often I'm not.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
03-18-2013, 01:55 PM
|
| |
I am surprised people are so accepting of such limited use of our camera's processors. Digital cameras really suffer by being designed and used as if they are the same as film bodies. They're not. The capabilities and limitations are very different. This is just one example.
As stated before - cameras already do this. Pentax doesn't have to innovate, just copy. The utility is being able to see which part of the image is exposed properly as well as the aggregate exposure information. It's not more exotic a demand than the desire to preview depth of field. In fact, it's odd that even when you do preview depth of field you still don't see the real exposure.
Regarding the utility of having a screen blow-out or go black, I'd call that good design. I've never wanted to take an exposure that wasn't properly set-up. If my screen is black I can quickly adjust the body to show the kind of image I want. That's why I shoot manual - total control.
Light meters are an option but still less flexible. Worse it's another piece of kit I shouldn't have to carry or worry about. The best light-meter for this task is the sensor in the body.
It's time camera manufacturers looked to people shooting digitally for input, not just journeymen old-timers who still rely on the techniques they learnt decades ago. I can produce images using the modern features of digital cameras that would be impossible without them. I simply want to use the tools I have as I choose to. Much of this thread sounds like shooters at the dawn of auto-focus laughing at those who wanted it to be better and suggesting they just focus manually.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
03-18-2013, 01:36 PM
|
| |
You're wrong. I don't need lessons in shooting - I know what I'm doing. You're describing how to use blinkies and the histogram, both of which I understand. The problem is that when shot manually, with ISO selected for a fixed value, the histogram reflects the screen, not the settings chosen by the operator. That's simply wrong.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
03-18-2013, 01:27 PM
|
| |
Thanks for reading the post and understanding the problem. Half the people here are talking down to me and I suspect have never shot their cameras truly manually. They don't even understand the issue.
An invalid histogram is worse than no histogram at all. It's actively misleading and a waste of screen real estate.I shouldn't have to switch it on and off as I change modes.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
03-13-2013, 08:44 AM
|
| |
The Canon G1 X does it. So do many others. They are fixed lens but I don't see why that's a problem. If the camera makes a guess, it can check that guess against the histogram of the exposed frame once it's been shot. In that way the camera can 'learn' the response of each lens.
That said, even an educated - conservative - guess is better than nothing. All I want is to be able to see if I'm blowing highlights or blocking shadows with some accuracy. If I'm shooting a portrait in front of a window I might be happy to blow the window but not the tablecloth. For that I need to see where in my image I'm overexposed.
I feel camera manufacturers are too mired in tradition. The idea that because we didn't have tool in the past we shouldn't need them now. Focus peaking is a great example of a new innovation which is a clear improvement on the of film paradigm. If Pentax were to be aggressive about software updates there'd be a huge amount of value in sticking with the brand.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
03-04-2013, 12:18 PM
|
| |
Plus that $130 case fits only one lens. If you never change the lens why bother with an ILC? A made in the USA Black Label Bags "Kando" fits perfectly, will take a range of cameras, and fits all the nice Pentax primes. It's $200 but will last decades. A much better option in my view.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
03-04-2013, 11:37 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
02-15-2013, 12:01 PM
|
| |
I'm with you Charles.
The boosters of these cheap Chinese lenses (that's a fact, not an insult) seem to think they're capable of magic. I.e. They've found a way to produce optically excellent lenses for a fraction of the cost of major brands without other significant compromise. The lack of AF certainly helps the price but the 'reviews' fans give this glass isn't realistic. Sigma have just managed to surpass Canon, Nikon and Zeiss with a 35mm 1.4 - Leica still beat everyone and charge people for the excellence.
At best these lenses are using decent optical formulas, good coatings and then wrapping them in inferior casings built to low standards. If that's not the case I expect a major brand to buy them wholesale and borrow their magical powers to take on the rest of the market.
Over time a lot of the value of a lens is how well it holds up, takes knocks, keeps ticking and stays smooth. I'm not sure this glass is built for that at all.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
01-07-2013, 09:58 PM
|
| |
That's a good point. What would motivate you to make a start?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
01-07-2013, 09:49 PM
|
| |
1. I did learn on a fully manual camera. I also shoot Leica.
2. DoF preview isn't what I mean. Exposure preview means just that - a reflection of the amount of light I'll capture at a given ISO, aperture and shutter speed.
3. The idea that tools which help you measure exposure are signs of lack of ability is false - unless you don't use a light meter and never bracket? My father made all his exposure calculations in his head. It made him slower than me, not better.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
01-07-2013, 05:30 PM
|
| |
You could be right but aperture and shutterspeed affect the image in very predictable ways. The screen doesn't have to be perfect, it just needs to provide a visual indication of what's happening. I.e. double the shutter speed, halve the amount of light. Double the aperture, four times more light hits the sensor.
In fact this is already happening. When we set the camera to blow-out, or record a dark frame, the K-01 is calculating what a balanced exposure would look like and then showing us the screen and histogram which fit. I'm simply asking that they calculate what we've set, not what the camera thinks is ideal. As the K-01 does this with any lens fitted today, there's no reason I can see it wouldn't show a 'real' exposure for any lens present either.The math on the total amount of light is trivial.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
01-07-2013, 04:58 PM
|
| |
In my experience it's easier to start afresh than try to Hijack something already going. They aren't focused on the K-01 for a reason. Even if they agreed it would be low priority.
My suggestion is to do something specific, with clear objectives, and using a model that pays rewards. It has worked in the Panasonic community which is similarly left of the mainstream.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
01-07-2013, 04:45 PM
|
| |
I'm not a coder capable of playing with firmware but I am a K01 owner who sees potential for a firmware project for the camera. It has excellent hardware and is not yet a year old. Its cost makes it accessible and there are a few obvious improvements that shouldn't be hard to implement.
Does anyone else think it would be worth supporting a 'Kickstarter' for a firmware project for the camera? My thought is that with a cash prize on offer we can pay bounties to coders/teams willing to take the job on.
I.e.
1. Exposure preview - $5,000
2. High-speed RAW shooting (i.e. bracketing with 0 ev set or faster) - $5000
...and more.
Say we had 4 targets and 4 bounties we'd need $20K to start. Assuming 1,000 supporters that would be a $20 investment. Of course, should goals not be met the money could be refunded and people who want the firmware but didn't support upfront could be required to wait before the firmware's posted publicly.
I'm spitballing but you get the idea.
I think this is too big a project to be done for nothing, and Pentax isn't a big enough brand to guarantee a cash free project would work.
What are your thoughts about the basic concept? I'm capable of building a website to host the project and manage it. Are people here interested in building a spec and getting behind it? CHDK has done great things for Canon but no-one's ever had a camera a capable as the K-01 available so cheaply.
NB: This is a first draft - please don't get caught up in the amounts mentioned or the specs. That will need to be done by consensus. If you are open to being involved - or perhaps can do some of the coding in return for a payday - let us know.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
01-07-2013, 04:27 PM
|
| |
Thanks for such an informative reply.
The problem is that it's not the 1970's. It made sense to operate as you described when a preview of the real captured exposure was impossible. On modern cameras though it forces us to pretend we are unable to see an exposure preview and it cripples the camera vs. the competition.
To clarify - the behavior of the camera can remain the same. The exposure is calculated for the screen, it doesn't have to be actual. The lens can remain open but when we set it to F22 the processor can calculate the loss of light and adjust the displays accordingly if desired. This has no effect of focusing and is how I believe the Canon's do it.
Pentax is not alone in this. We are still stuck in a film-based paradigm and manufacturers are being very slow to realize the old restrictions don't apply. Focus peaking is the easiest example. It makes using manual focus better than it ever was. It would be great to see Pentax embracing firmware updates as a way of adding value.
I also hope there's a K01 firmware project underway.
|
