|
Forum: General Photography
08-29-2023, 09:16 PM
|
| |
K2 is better than the KM and the K1000. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
12-01-2013, 07:59 PM
|
| |
We went out to a new American Style Grill restaurant in Bendigo last Friday night for my Birthday. It was damned good too. One of my boys decided to try a Bud, and liked it. I feel like a failure as a parent. (I stuck to Coopers Pale Ale).
On another beer related note, we went out to a Craft Beer Festival at the racecourse on Saturday. Heaps of the smaller breweries from around the state showing off their products. My favourite for the day, "7 cent brewery - Belgian Dark Strong Ale" (abv=9%). Magnificent, and pretty much the polar opposite of a 'bud'.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
11-23-2013, 03:30 AM
|
| |
I've had a K2 since 1983.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
11-01-2013, 04:04 PM
|
| |
There was also some nice photos of old Pentax cameras.
:D
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-17-2016, 06:07 PM
|
| |
I agree completely. This looks to be a terrific camera at a very competitive price which will suit the vast majority of Pentax users very well.
The negative comments and complaints that it doesn't do specific things (eg it isn't a perfect video camera) are in my opinion pretty pointless if not entirely unexpected. I remember reading the same sorts of nonsense when the K3 was released.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-19-2014, 02:46 AM
|
| |
The 18-135 is surprisingly sharp in the middle even when wide open pretty much right though the zoom range and I reckon the edges are reasonably sharp except maybe wide open at 135mm. Stopped down to around f8 it's pretty sharp across the frame at all focal lengths. It's better than I expected it to be. Focus is quick and accurate, and it focuses reasonably close. I reckon it's a really good walk around lens and good value for the money.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
12-07-2014, 11:47 PM
|
| |
DA 55-300 at 170mm, iso800, f5.6, 1/320
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
12-02-2014, 07:31 PM
|
| |
Please accept my humble apologies.
PS, this is one more towards the 12k. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
11-06-2013, 02:22 PM
|
| |
It amuses me greatly when people announce that they are unsubscribing from a thread.
Why would anyone care if you are subscribed to the thread or not? :p
|
|
Forum: Visitors' Center
12-04-2013, 08:49 PM
|
| |
No argument that the DF is a good camera. The retro styling does appear to have some minor negative effects on function however.
Your comment
misses the whole point.
Current DSLRs are shaped and styled similar to later film models because those shapes are ergonomically efficient and are practical to manufacture with modern technology. Older film cameras were more angular and less ergonomically efficient because manufacturing technology didn't allow these shapes to be made economically. The DF has been made slightly less ergonomic in order to appeal to a particular market (dare I say retired baby-boomers with plenty of cash and fond memories of the 1970s). As I said before, I don't see a problem with that, but it is silly to suggest that there is any advantage in making the camera look 'old school' at the expense of function.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
10-20-2013, 09:16 PM
|
| |
JJJPhoto's comments about brand snobbery reminded my of a little story I thought I would share. (Apologies in advance for meandering off topic a little, but it is vaguely related to the OP and subsequent discussion.)
My recent acquisition of a K-5 II was influenced by three main things. Fond memories of my Pentax film cameras, the ability to use my old lenses, and last and not least, what I considered to be very good value for money. It's interesting to me that so many people really aren't even aware that there are digital SLR cameras which aren't either Canon or Nikon.
One of my mates has a son who some time ago got a Canon (60D I think) with a couple of kit zoom lenses. He's been having a bit of fun with it and I took my gear around to their house the other day and showed him. Up until the moment he held the K5 in his hand I'm sure he had assumed his Canon was a superior camera ('cause that's what the marketing tells everyone). His first comment was 'wow, that feels solid and really well made' (the comment accompanied by a genuine look of surprise). I have no doubt that when he bought the Canon, he was not even aware that Pentax DSLRs existed.
The point of the story is that in addition to brand snobbery, there is also just a lack of knowledge about options outside the Canikon world. I hope Ricoh can continue to improve the Pentax brand products and strengthen and grow market share. Maybe if they can significantly improve their sales volumes the price of some of those lovely lenses might come down a bit??? Here's hoping.... :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
10-17-2013, 02:01 AM
|
| |
Kunzite saved me from having to respond to all of your points Pioneer, so I will just comment on what I've left in the quote above. I don't think the RICOH on the back of the K-3 is even all that prominent. To be honest I don't notice PENTAX on the back of my K-5 II either. Generally when I'm using it I will be looking through the viewfinder. I reckon other people might notice the large PENTAX on the front of the camera though.
I'm also quite confident that Ricoh wouldn't have spent the amount of time and money they have promoting the brand and developing products if they intended to shelve it. It really doesn't make any sense.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
10-16-2013, 11:18 PM
|
| |
At the risk of being accused of repeating myself. Have you not noticed PENTAX is written in bold letters in the prism housing of the K-3?
There is no evidence at all to suggest Ricoh has any intention of dropping the Pentax brand name. This thread really is ridiculous.
|
