|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-04-2016, 05:08 PM
|
| |
I made the switch to a Nikon D7200 for the improved AF system. My keeper rate was around 10%-15% with my Pentax, and the inverse with the Nikon. Same monkey behind the lens, but for my shooting, the Nikon made all the difference in the world. I miss the green button and that's about it.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-23-2015, 11:38 AM
|
| |
^^^ Very Nice ^^^ Thank you!
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-22-2015, 09:44 PM
|
| |
^^^ this is good stuff I will use, thank you for taking the time write and post this. I would love to see some of your work.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-21-2015, 05:27 PM
|
| |
I have been doing a variation of this, but did not think to use the EV compensation. I was just adjusting either the f stop or shutter speed.
Thank you!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-21-2015, 05:23 PM
|
| |
I may be a two brand shooter. The Nikon can seem to do action so much better than anything Pentax that I have decided to get the D7200 and try it out with the shooting we do most. Still trying to decide on lenses, but I think I may just get one bundled with a 18-140 to get my feet wet and then decide where to go from there. I started shooting with a Nikon F way back in my late teens, so this new 7200 should be a bit different.
I do think I will hang onto a Pentax body and invest in some limited primes for the artsy stuff that they seem to do so well, and at a cost that Nikon & Canon cannot match.
Thanks for all the great replies and experience.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-20-2015, 09:07 AM
|
| |
In keeping with the "less is more" concept and the great ISO performance of modern cameras, where do you draw the line on how bright your lens (i.e. big and heavy) needs to be?
For a walk around zoom for instance; is there any real need for an f2.8 capable lens? Indoor sports, sure, but how much can we overcome with just ISO and still be reasonably happy with the output?
I ask this after a long outing with a big bright zoom. The 16-85 3.5/5.6 is starting to look good to me.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-19-2015, 01:38 PM
|
| |
Owning the sigma 50-150 and the Tamron 70-200 could be considered redundant, but again, if each lens covers a specific task better than the other, who's to say owning both isnt exactly what you need. I think the 50-150 focal length would be better for concert applications and chasing the little one around than the 70-200.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-19-2015, 01:05 PM
|
| |
The 50-150 has a much faster focus motor than the 50-135.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-19-2015, 01:02 PM
|
| |
I have adjusted my lenses for FF/BF and that seem fine. I'm not fond of live view for my shooting style, although it is very useful for macro work.
I am currently comparing the K3 to the Nikon D7200..... and the Nikon is winning. I like everything about the K3 that brought me to Pentax in the first place; size, build quality, a great interface, great control options, WR bodies and lenses. I Just cannot escape the fear that I will get an improvement in the keeper rate, but not a big enough one to stay with the Pentax brand.
If anyone here has had time behind both cameras, I would love to hear your opinions and experiences. Please give me a reason to get the K3 over the D7200.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-18-2015, 05:22 PM
|
| |
I find a good majority of our every day photographs are of our dogs, both on the ranch with their livestock and at shows. So far, my experience with the K50s' abilities in catching and keeping focus on a moving object and lacking.
I always hear people say, "use the right tool for the job," and for us, that seems to be fast zooms for lenses. I'm just afraid the K50 is the wrong body.
I have even considered jumping over to Nikon for that very reason. I really love the Pentax features and ergonomics, but need better autofocus ability.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-18-2015, 04:41 PM
|
| |
Is there any real practical advantage to the K-3 focusing ability and accuracy over that of the K 50?
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-16-2015, 03:23 PM
|
| |
When I put a 2.8 lens on my K50, am I confusing it? I read that the K50 cannot handle any lens brighter than f3.5? I am trying to understand why I cannot get reliable focus on my K50. I have a 18-138 and a Sigma 50-150 2.8. I am getting so incredibly frustrated looking at great pictures ..... except for the fact that the subject i out of focus. We do a lot of photos of our dogs and moving objects, but even the stills have way more misses than I deem acceptable.
I am going to check the calibration now that I got my camera back from service and see if I have a FF / BF issue going on.
Any help would be great.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-15-2015, 05:21 PM
|
| |
Stupor question:
How does it know what your subject is?
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-15-2015, 03:13 PM
|
| |
I have a K50 and wanted to know what would be the best focus setting for action type photos? I have been using single point for most things, but thought there may be an advantage to going with a different setting
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-15-2015, 06:43 AM
|
| |
I own the Sigma 50-150 2.8 and it is a great lens. It is quite sharp from 2.8 on, and has a nice warm rendering - even the bokeh is nice. I think it would make a great low light concert lens. I would get it over the 70-200 and add a longer prime for extended reach or maybe a 1.4 x adaptor.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-27-2015, 10:38 AM
|
| |
This prime vs zoom thing always makes roll my eyes. They different tools for different jobs with some cross over. Ask the pertanant questions for the task and the answer is usually clear.
Buying a truck? I would ask,
"How much do you want to haul and how often? "
In general terms, primes will be lighter in bulk and weight, with better image quality. Not alway better, but generally. Zooms are more versital.
I will buy the new 24-70 because I like the options I have for its use, and when I'm out on the ranch, I don't want to be changing lenses if I can help it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-25-2015, 07:13 PM
|
| |
Well done my friend, well done!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-25-2015, 02:36 PM
|
| |
I for one am thrilled with this announcement; this is the lens I was hoping for. Pentax conceived of this lens for me, because I am the majority. like most of Pentaxians, I am a hobbyist, not a professional. I want 90% of the ability available to the pro's at half the cost. I want quality, flexibility, weather sealing and Pentax rendering.
I have read this whole thread and see some of the same people that visit my gun forums, and other interest sites. I am talking about those unhappy with this announcement because it was not a * lens, chiseled out of diamonds in the underground Pentax bunker by naked Pentax optical supermodels. These members are those extremely talented and knowledgeable uber enthusiasts and professionals that want, and can actually use, the attributes that would have made this a $2,400 lens instead of a $1,300 lens. Remember, this is one of the most desirable focal ranges for both APS-C and FF, giving it a huge potential audience. Why would Pentax play to the fringe?
The release of the 150 -450 is exactly the kind of lens that NEEDED to be a * quality lens. It is a mission specific tool that has a limited market share. The limited number of people that can justify such a piece of glass will pay for it, and Pentax knows that. Its like a car company using a flagship sports car to promote the whole brand, the company gets market share from those who may never buy it, but dream that they could if they really wanted to.
This 24-70 is exactly what it needed to be, and it will sell like hot-cakes if it performs as good or better than its assumed Tamron relative. Pentax need sales to move the brand forward, and that will happen faster with product like this. Pro glass is coming, as is FF for those that can pay the ticket cost, but they are most certainly in the minority. I think we are going to see more of this kind of partnership rather than less moving forward. lets face it; third party glass no longer sucks.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-17-2015, 07:46 AM
|
| |
Pre full frame grear purge perhaps?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-05-2015, 09:12 PM
|
| |
The Sigma 50-150 HSM is the answer to your problem, but they are few and far between.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-05-2015, 08:55 PM
|
| |
I assume a lens from Japan has no warranty in the USA?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-02-2015, 04:23 PM
|
| |
That is good to know, it takes most of the worry away from the SDM issue, one would just need to make sure of the build date. But, compared to the Sigma 17-50, it still looks to be optically inferior. The reviews of the Pentax 16-50 seem to agree the edges and corners are much softer and it is not as sharp wide open. Maybe its picking nits, but for the price, it should be the other way around, shouldn't it?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-01-2015, 06:40 PM
|
| |
I also contemplate waiting for the Pentax 24ish - 70ish coming in October+/- . My initial thought is it will be too expensive, but given the cost of a two lens solution, it may be the less expensive option.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-01-2015, 03:13 PM
|
| |
It does fit the bill on paper, but the SDM issues make it a non starter for me - even Pentax is abandoning the technology. I also think the Sigma gives better results than the Pentax and it is also quite a bit more expensive (although less than the two lens solution).
---------- Post added 09-01-15 at 03:16 PM ----------
What about the rendering don't you like? Maybe post an example if you have one?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-01-2015, 01:42 PM
|
| |
I have a K50 and a sigma 50–150 HSM that I love, very sharp and fast. I will be selling my Pentax 18 135 and looking to replace it on the wider end. I've been looking at the Sigma 17–50, I've seen lots of photos and read lots of reviews, it seems like a very safe choice, and if it was weather sealed I would already have it.
I have also been looking at the new 16–85 mainly due to its whether sealing. It is also quite sharp even wide open, or so it seems, but I would like something a bit faster. I would like a lens I can use to shoot in an enclosed area without the need for a flash that is fairly wide AND I would like a weather sealed walk around option. Maybe this means a two lens solution, I would love to hear any advice from the form.
|
