|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
12-16-2018, 03:38 PM
|
| |
Thanks for all that disasterfilm. I appreciate your insights into the lens.
Sincerely
|
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
12-14-2018, 11:01 PM
|
| |
Hi,
Please tell me how this compares to the DFA 100 mm macro Pentax brand.
I know the DFA has AF and weather resistance.
Does the Rokinon compare well in quality and build ?
Thanks for your advice
|
|
Forum: Weekly Photo Challenges
11-17-2017, 10:16 AM
|
| |
You lucky private - you drew Gettysburg...there's nothing going on there!
|
|
Forum: Pentax Forums Giveaways
12-23-2016, 06:28 AM
|
| |
Merry Christmas and Happy new year to all.
Best wishes,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-04-2016, 09:11 PM
|
| |
Hi Robert,
You are getting great advice and some of this can get overwhelming.
Some of the lenses mentioned are expensive!
Since you are in college and still using kit lenses for the most part, I like the idea of upgrading your 18-55 (esp. if that is the range you are using the most)
Sigma 17-50 has been suggested.
Tamron makes a 17-50 f2.8 that has similar reviews and is usually a bit less expensive.
I have never use the Pentax 16-50 - but that is def the most expensive of the 3.
I don't have experience in advertising and I have never sold any of my photos.
Adam's idea about using FB (and you might as well leverage your other social sites) sounds like a good place to start until you have the money to spend.
Maybe your next lens after a 17-50 could be a portrait lens if you are planning on doing that - 50mm f1.8 could work or a 70mm f2.4
If you are going to need something longer the tamron 70-200 (less cost than the sigma) may be the way to go.
Regards,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-22-2016, 11:11 AM
|
| |
Hi All,
Thanks for all the wonderful feedback and advice.
I was going to make an offer - the great things I read (from the above) about it, including the thought given to me from dcshooter (try it and considering selling it on ebay if desired) made me want to pull the trigger. However, when I went to pull up the listing, I can no longer find it :(
The seller either retracted the lens, or another Pentaxian came to his/her senses more quickly than I did.
Best regards,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-22-2016, 04:49 AM
|
| |
Hi dcshooter,
Thanks for the advice. What are your feelings about the ratings on PF? Does it compare well to the other lenses with similar range.
The ratings are similar to the tamron and sigma that cost so much less, I am not sure why.
Thanks,
---------- Post added 11-22-16 at 06:53 AM ----------
Hi rkapleby,
Thanks for the information. I noticed the 5 rating also, and agree that the low rating skews things. But I see that happening often in the user ratings section.
Many of the other lenses reviewed offset that lowballer with high ratings. The 24-70 has a 9.5 with over 50% of the ratings a 10.
I notice that the tamron and sigma in the 17-50 and 17-70, etc are scored very similar to the Pentax 28-70 despite the much lower prices.
Probably 2 big factors are the higher price and weight like you said.
Thanks,
---------- Post added 11-22-16 at 06:59 AM ----------
Hi Adam,
Thanks for your comment and recommendation.
I just recently made some "big" lens purchases and cannot afford the 24-70 in the $1000+ range. I have not priced it on the used market, but I imagine that it is demanding around $1000.
I may be able to get the local used 28-70 for $400 or so (asking is $450)
I use a K3 and not a K1 yet, so I imagine per your original comment that the 28-70 would be a good performer on the K-3.
I could test it out before I buy it. I have never done that. In fact, I would not even know how to do that properly.
I am not well versed in CA, aberrations, corner sharpness, etc.
Does anyone have a good resource or checklist on the best way to test a lens - especially for a first timer?
Best,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-21-2016, 08:32 PM
|
| |
Hi,
Please tell me your experience with the FA* 28-70 lens.
From what I have seen the FA* lenses are rated very well.
However, the 28-70 is rated under 9!
Whereas the new DFA 24-70 is rated over 9.5 (user reviews).
And then there is the DA* 16-50 with WR.
Which one of these would you choose?
I have someone locally selling the FA* 28-70 for $450.
I already have many kit lenses and Tamron 17-50 f2.8.
But I keep on hearing about the Pentax magic of the FA* series. It just seems like the 28-70 is not as magical per the user reviews.
Please shed some light on this...especially if you can compare the 28-70 to other "similar" lenses like
1. Pentax 16-50
2. Pentax 24-70 (new)
3. Tamron
4. Sigma.
Thanks so much in advance!
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-17-2016, 12:54 PM
|
| |
Hi Bui,
Mine is a 50mm F4 M series...my apologies.
I think they are almost identical though...please someone correct me if I am mistaken.
IMO - $100 is a lot for the lens since you already have and enjoy the 50mm f1.7.
I only obtained my lens after work yesterday and have not used it much, but I am betting it will be on par or maybe a little better in sharpness c/w the f1.7.
But of course, slower than the f1.7.
I don't know your $ situation though...
if $100 is no big deal for you, then by all means go for it.
if it was me, I would save the $100 for now (u already have a nice 50mm lens) and save up just a bit more for a full 1:1 macro.
Hope this helps...
radman
P.s. welcome to pentaxforums!
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-17-2016, 10:21 AM
|
| |
Hi,
Good ?
Here's my experience from 1 day's use of the lens and already having owned a 50mm f2.8 macro...
The 50mm f4 m series that I got yesterday seems super sharp. It's nice even at F4.
It's only a 1:2 macro (not 1:1), but that's still pretty good for what I do.
I myself would not have gotten the 50mm f4 if it was not the right price...I got mine for quite a deal on CL with a 50mm f1.4 m lens... because I already have the fa2.8 macro.
However, if you do not need the 2.8 and the 1:1 - it seems like a great lens based on my few shots and the reviews that I read.
I feel it is going to be a great walk around and non-macro lens too.
Hope this helps,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-70 & KF
11-08-2016, 11:19 AM
|
| |
Interesting how it won (10) in almost every category (losing in only 4) and still has a similar rating to the other 2 cameras.
I have not read the whole review or ever used the k-70...but those are my 2 cents.
radman
|
|
Forum: General Photography
10-16-2016, 12:06 PM
|
| |
Hi,
Just watched Jaws - and you are right on --- it was a Honeywell Spotmatic.
Radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
10-11-2016, 02:32 PM
|
| |
I "liked" your posts above...thanks for the recommendations on caps.
Sincerely,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
10-10-2016, 03:20 PM
|
| |
Is there a difference between the caps?
If not, the 5 deal is a better price.
Thanks in advance for your advice.
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-06-2016, 07:12 AM
|
| |
Hi,
I am going to make this brief since I am late to the discussion and I have already read about your budget limit.
I was going to recommend the Tamron (or Sigma equiv) 70-200 f2.8 for low light action. However, this is in the 500+ range used. Something to look into at a later time maybe. I am not sure of the value of your other lenses, but if you could sell them and put them toward the cost of another lens...this is the all in one (70-200 mm range) lens I would recommend.
The 50 mm recommendations above make sense to me because of the fast apertures (1.8 and 1.7) but may allow for adequate reach.
I do not have experience with the 85mm fast lenses, but personally I have NOT had success using MF lenses for my sports photography. I know people are successful with MF for sports, but not me. I imagine it take experience, practice, patience, and I would guess a resultant higher (comp to AF) miss rate.
1 last thing that I did not see mentioned above. Try panning your camera to help slow the action of your subject.
Hope this helps,
radman
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
09-12-2016, 08:13 PM
|
| |
Great advice in this thread - I am going to try some different things based on others comments.
Here is what I have been trying to do with the faster aperture...I usually stay at f2.8.
I try to get my subject/player in focus and get the others in the foreground and background as out of focus as possible.
My feeling is that it emphasizes the action and the "active" player.
Not to steal the thread - but instead to expand it....what are your thoughts?
Thanks,
radman
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
09-12-2016, 07:59 PM
|
| |
Hi,
Pursuant to my comments above,,,here are some examples of what I have been trying to do with the faster aperture...I usually stay at f2.8.
I try to get my subject/player in focus and get the others in the foreground and background as out of focus as possible.
My feeling is that it emphasizes the action and the "active" player.
Please comment on the photos and what are your thoughts on the f2.8 aperture?
Looking at the football photos above, it seems to me that I am sacrificing sharpness by trying to get the players "isolated"
These are my first photos posted here ever (as far as I can recall)...I usually hesitate to put myself "out there"
Thanks for any and all feedback,
radman
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
09-12-2016, 07:48 PM
|
| |
Settings are- K-5iis shooting RAW DNG files
- DA* 200mm no uv filter...this is the first year i've shot without it and I think it has made a difference in quality and faster shutter
- Sirui monopod / leg from N-2004X tripod
- Sirui K-20x ballhead
- aperture priority usually set at 5.6 ... sometimes 8.0 if i want more DOF. by the end of 1st half i will usually be opened up to 3.5 and by end of game wide open at 2.8
- auto iso fast setting -- daytime at 200 - 21560 and evening/night time 800 - 21560. I have iso set to 1/3 stop increments.
- auto white balance
- center-weighted metering
- AFC spot auto focus tracking using single frame drive mode
- DarkTable
- Adobe Creative Cloud -- Bridge and Lightroom
I'm also open to and welcome any suggestions.
Varsity had a bye last week, so here are this weeks varsity favs. I'll mix up the middle school and varsity next week.
Hi,
I am not sure I can offer anything to make your shots any better...they are already outstanding.
One thing I have been doing different than your technique is staying at f4 or below. Usually f2.8 for most of the game, even when the game starts during the sunny times.
I like trying to isolate the players from whatever is in the foreground and background. After seeing your photos, I am going to mix it up though, you have some SHARP pictures.
Please comment on your use of the fixed 200mm lens. Do you feel limited compared to a zoom?
I am using the tamron 70-200 f2.8 on my K-3, and I zoom in and out all the time.
Is the picture quality better on the 200mm vs the 70-200 at 200mm? If so, in what way? DOF, sharpness?
I thought about getting a 200mm, but that seems redundant to me.
Then I thought about the 300mm f4 (or the older version 300mm f4.5 for cheaper) but the f4 and more so the 4.5 seemed like it would be too slow...especially after sunset.
I appreciate your thoughts and insight!
Sincerely,
radman
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
09-11-2016, 01:12 PM
|
| |
Hi,
I shoot a lot of soccer and field hockey games and use the K-3 and Tamron 70-200.
I usually shoot manual mode and sometimes go the TAv route.
I agree with the above comments including:
1. Try getting focus during slow action to practice getting your subject in focus.
2. High shutter speed to help stop action
3. Try Af-s and Af-C and see which works better for you.
One point I disagree on is with respect to the depth of field. I usually stay at f2.8 or at most f4 when shooting the action of the game. Sometimes I will increase the aperture to take pictures of the kids on the sidelines and during huddles.
You may not want to stay this low in the beginning, because it is harder to get your target (subject) in focus. But eventually, something to "shoot" for (pun intended).
Of course, this is a matter of opinion...however, I feel most of my best action shots isolate the active players (the ones with the ball) from the other players (foreground and background).
For example, in the second photo included above, if your target was the goalie in yellow - nice shot in my opinion - separating the goalie from the other objects (players, ball, ref...) on the field.
I hope this helps,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax Forums Giveaways
09-08-2016, 02:52 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Sold Items
06-30-2016, 08:36 PM
|
| |
Hi,
Thanks UncleVanya
So the hood is very small, right?
Is it useful or necessary for this lens?
I have read that it is fickle.
Thanks for the info!!
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
06-29-2016, 10:49 PM
|
| |
Hi,
Does the 40mm come with a hood?
Thanks,
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-02-2016, 10:45 AM
|
| |
Hi,
I thought I read that SR should NOT be used when using very fast shutter speeds like for action/sports...
Is this true, for instance when shooting a soccer game with 1/1000 or 1/1600 speed should one take the SR off?
Thanks,
radman
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-27-2016, 02:24 PM
|
| |
Hi
Please tell me about lenses with fungus.
I a no expert but the lens I found at the thrift shop looks to have fungus on the rear element. I could not wipe it off, it looks like a branching pattern and almost like a cobweb.
It covers most of the rear element but I can certainly still see through the lens from front to back.
It is a screw mount super tak 135/3.5. That otherwise looks OK. I don't have an adapter
But if I get this lens and the Honeywell that it is attached to for $10 then I would use this lens on my k3 with an adapter.
Can fungus move from the lens to my k3 ?
Thank you
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
04-21-2016, 09:35 AM
|
| |
Hi nomadkng,
Great story to drive home your point...If the k-5iis is such a step down in AF,,,maybe I should just forget about the k100D or even k20D for sports (most of what I do) shooting.
In regards to swapping lenses, I have not been able to convince these highschoolers to stop (or even slow down) for me when I am photographing them at soccer, field hockey, etc:D
WRT using the 50-150,,,well I have been trying to figure out how to get longer than 200 (maybe the pentax HD 1.4x) because the fields are so large (over 100 yards).
Thanks
|
