|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
05-29-2018, 05:24 PM
|
| |
?
Bokeh is a property of the lens, not the body.
Let's not 'put mayo' on the good news of this upgrade.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
03-17-2018, 11:42 AM
|
| |
You cannot make assessments on brand alone. Hoya makes excellent filters and they make junk. As do most brands. They make filters for discount shops to sell for $20 and they make filters that sell for over $200. You have to specify which line of filter within the brand.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-23-2018, 12:12 PM
|
| |
Sorry, I have to say the damage Precision made to my lens is beyond imagination. I wouldn't describe it as mistake. To be honest, I strongly think the person touched my lens had no knowledge on repairing lenses. If Precision has technicians like this, no matter how small percentage they consist of, I have every reason to be concerned. Of course, this is just my experience and observation.
Now, back to the upgrade thing: What if I take a $550 loss on my K-1 to sell it and buy K1-II instead? Assuming my purchasing price of K-1II is same as that of my K-1, then it is a level ground. I will end up getting everything new. Not bad.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-23-2018, 08:38 AM
|
| |
I am definitely not going to be the FIRST person to send my K-1 to them. Hopefully they have improved since my last experience and I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Especially since we have no choice. But I'll let others be the guinea pigs.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-23-2018, 08:51 AM
|
| |
I've had my share of headaches with Precision over the last few years. I would only send them my gear if I absolutely had to. If I were to upgrade my K-1, that would fall into the "had to" category.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-23-2018, 07:50 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-08-2017, 10:58 PM
|
| |
This 'equivalence' crap has to stop! :D
The aperture doesn't change. The focal length doesn't change. The exposure doesn't change. The depth of field doesn't change.
What you get is the middle fifty percent of the FF frame, that's actually what 'crop' means, a reduced field of view.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-18-2017, 12:09 PM
|
| |
How to Photograph a Solar Eclipse | B&H Explora
 Quote: Gear: Solar Filters
When photographing the sun, you will need a solar filter for your camera and lens.The ONLY time the filter is not needed is when the sun is completely obscured by the moon during the totality portion of a total solar eclipse.
Several online tutorials mention using a neutral density filter or stacking neutral density (ND) filters. I ONLY recommend using a properly designated solar filter. I am not alone in this recommendation. Experts at NASA, the National Science Foundation, the American Astronomical Society, Nikon, Space.com, Sky & Telescope magazine, and others all recommend solar filters instead of neutral density filters. Why? Because these are the only filters designed specifically for viewing the sun, and they are constructed to not only sufficiently dim the sunlight, but they also protect your eyes and equipment from non-visible IR and UV radiation. Solar photography is NOT the time to experiment with homemade filtration concoctions, like stacking polarizers and ND filters, in an effort to save a few bucks.
There are some ND filters out there marketed for solar photography. If you are looking for this type of filter, it looks like the consensus among brands is that 16-stops is the minimum strength for a filter. In comparing different brands, there was a dramatic difference between the light transmission of one brand’s 16.5-stop filter and a competing brand. This concerns me a bit. Use at your own risk!
WARNING: Do NOT use these ND filters with an optical viewfinder! Many come with fine-print on their packaging, so use due diligence and stick to using your Live View mode or an electronic viewfinder. Your safest option is a solar filter, but the optical glass ND filter may have other uses besides solar photography.
----------
WARNING: Regardless of the filter system you employ, take care to ensure the filter does not accidently come off your rig while photographing the sun.
Restated to emphasize: Filters are needed at all times for solar viewing, except during the height of a total solar eclipse. So, when photographing the sun during totality, you should remove your filters. More on this later. The only time it may be safe to point a camera or look at the eclipse is during the period of totality when the moon entirely covers the solar disk. This means you need to be in an area where the eclipse will be total.
So you're thinking maybe you can point your camera at the sun only during totality (provided you drive down to SC into the areas of totality). By the time you get everything set the period will probably have passed. According to NASA the period of totality in Columbia, SC will be 2 min 30 sec. Think you can get setup in less than half that time? Odds are you will be looking and pointing your camera directly at the sun long before and after the eclipse begins and ends.
Get a proper filter for your camera and your eyes. Damage to the retina from looking directly at the sun can take years to manifest.
Yeah, ok you're thinking, the sensor has UV and IR filters so a ND filter should be enough. Maybe not, since those filters are designed for ambient light and not the concentrated light coming direct from the sun. Put some broad spectrum SPF 50 (UVA, UVB, and IRA blocking) sunscreen on the back of your hand. Now take a magnifying glass and focus the noon sun on the back of your hand. How long do you think the sunscreen is going to protect you?
A solar eclipse is coming to America. Here?s what you?ll see where you live. - Vox
Path of Totality 2017 - August 21st Solar Eclipse Maps and Photo Guide
How Long Will the 2017 Solar Eclipse Last? Depends Where You Are |
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
02-19-2017, 12:00 PM
|
| |
Technical name f the effect is scintillation. Has to do with thermal movement of the air between you and the subject resulting in micro lensing of air of slightly different densities and therefore optical properties, which because it is caused by the thermal energy in the air is constantly varying.
The same effect leads to twinkling of stars and of city lights at night.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-11-2017, 08:24 AM
|
 | K1
Posted By
Bengan |
Replies: 14
Views: 1,294
|
|
Not helping, and IMO not a nice way to treat a new forum member (or anyone for that matter). If you didn't wish to help, you could just have refrained from answering.
Yes it would have been easier to come up with suggestions if the OP had told us a bit more about what and how, but then let's ask...
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-28-2017, 11:44 AM
|
| |
This is why I love this forum. No putdowns. No snide remarks. No Internet Nazis. Just friendly people willing to help. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
01-20-2017, 02:24 PM
|
| |
Remember, the reason equivalists say APSC is so much inferior is because they insist on forcing the APSC frame to fit the FF (in terms of FoV and DoF) and only compare after this. And that gives APSC a massive disadvantage and makes it look worse by comparison.
If you use APSC mode and use that photo as a 15MP photo, then it will look the same as FF, with edges cut off. IF you blow up that 15MP to 36MP, then the image will look worse than one taken directly at full 36MP, obviously. IF you take that 15MP image and change its ISO and aperture to get the same DoF and FoV as the FF mode, then it will look worse.
tl;dr: Use APSC if you wish, don't worry about it. Feel free to check threads that test DA and other crop lenses on FF, as sometimes you can get away with something more than APSC (like APSH). If you have a nice 36MP sensor, it makes sense that you use it as much as you can
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-24-2016, 09:46 AM
|
| |
Anyone have an image demonstrating the evils of SR?
I have hundreds of images showing the benefits of SR, I have thrown out images showing what happens when SR is off, and your tripod is vibrated by wind or other movement. I have seen way more images ruined because SR was either off, or wasn't strong enough.
But an image ruined or degraded by SR? I can't think of single image.
As far as i can tell the logic behind turning SR is that 5 years ago Pentax said to.
I'm one of those guys who never seems to be able to follow "rules" written by experts, I check things out on my own. And so far, the turn SR off on a tripod makes no sense to me. But maybe someone else has something.
But understand "5 years ago Pentax said so" doesn't mean a damn thing for me. I'm a shooter, not a reader, if I can't see it in images, it doesn't exist.
Right now, turn SR off on the tripod doesn't exist, except maybe in the manuals of cameras I no longer own.
My latest, monopod with SR on images...
Click here....
Where exactly is the problem?
I mean believe what you want I don't care. But should you be advising others based on your hunches?
If this is so important, why has Pentax apparently left it out of their last two manuals?
Does everything that applied to 3 models ago, apply to the modern SR units? You know they are rated for more stops, do people really think the new ones operate the exact same way the old ones did?
K-1 section on Shake reduction:
Quote: By using the built-in Shake Reduction unit of the camera, blurring of images can be reduced. Set in [Shake Reduction] of the A4 menu.
t Memo
• TheShakeReductionfunctioncanalsobeturnedonoroffby
the Smart Function. (p.19)
• When[ShakeReduction]isassignedtoXorY,youcan
turn the Shake Reduction function on or off by a simple button operation. (p.98)
The following features can be set in [Lens Correction] of the A4 menu. I guess K-1 users are supposed to find out about turning SR off from K-7 users or something.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
12-22-2016, 06:06 PM
|
| |
Full frame advantages (* * * to me * * *)
- Shallow DOF at a given working distance from the subject. DOF of 100mm lens at f/2.8 is the same regardless of whether used on 16x24mm or 24x36mm sensor at the same distance. But to achieve the same field of view with the same lens you can be closer with a larger sensor and therefore DOF is reduced. Good for portraits.
- Greater field of view at 1:1 for macro. To achieve 1:1 magnification you must be a fixed distance from the subject at a given focal length. Using a larger sensor puts more of the subject into the frame at 1:1 versus a smaller sensor using the same lens.
- Better dynamic range and less noise is possible. The pixel pitch on larger sensors is generally larger than smaller sensors. Larger photosensors tend to have less noise. This advantage gets cancelled out as most full frame sensors have higher pixel count than APS.
- More efficient use of the body size and existing lenses of the entire SLR platform. Most SLR bodies and lenses are based on a 24x36mm frame size. That includes DA lenses that only project an APS image circle. The mount size of a DA lens is still the same as that of an FA type lens. APS sensor bodies are still nearly as large as full frame bodies. Pentax seems to me to do the best job here with their APS bodies compared to other brands. K-1 @ 1000g versus K-3 @ 800g. So the K-3 is 20% lighter. But the K-3 sensor is 67% the size. If it was truly proportional the body would only weigh 667g. Fuji has an edge here because they designed their platform around the smaller sensor. Canon and Nikon (and possibly now Pentax) are committing more and more to the "full frame" game because their existing platforms were all based on that frame size for the last 50+ years.
Full frame disadvantages (* * * to me * * *)
- Shallow DOF. What was an advantage in some situations can be a detriment in others like landscapes where you want super deep DOF. Shooting from the same distance at the same aperture and capturing the same field of view with full frame versus APS you'll have greater DOF on APS because you'll be using a shorter focal length.
- Shows edge weakness in many lenses. "Cropping" the image circle by using an APS sensor often gives you the best quality image because most lenses are weaker (lower res, more distorted, more CA) near the edges. If you use full frame you have to invest heavily in the best glass possible to get full value from each shot. If you end up cropping the outer 1/3 of most frames because of poor lens performance you should have just shot the images on APS to start with and "pre-cropped" the bad parts of the frame out.
- Storage. Bigger sensors with more pixels have bigger file sizes that take up more disc space and are slower to ingest, process, print and archive.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-26-2016, 10:02 PM
|
| |
16-50. A real Debbie downer. When I saw many people refer to this lens as a stack of primes I just had to have it. Sadly it was more like a stack of $&!7.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
08-17-2016, 11:29 AM
|
| |
Finally my K-1 arrived, and I of course had to do a test image with pixel shift.
And it works.
Developed in DCU, sharpness turned down all the way.
Crop 400% (yes, I like to pixel peep).
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
06-16-2016, 11:02 PM
|
| |
Maybe because they realized they spent $4K and they can't really see much of a difference in their photographs compared to their APS-c gear? :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
05-29-2016, 06:15 AM
|
| |
And to match a 300mm (not to mention 450mm, 560mm) on APSC with good DoF, you need a monster of a lens on FF! And to match the extra magnification from APSC you get in macro range (virtually pushing you beyond 1:1) you need an enlarger lens! Good luck with those!
Matching different formats is Sisyphus' errand
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
03-16-2016, 04:32 AM
|
| |
But how on earth does this have any relevance to the topic.
If the new sensor has new tech behind it (software, chipset etc) thus making its performance better, how does taking a centre crop from an image make it "the same" as an older crop sensor of 16mp.
When Ricoh got their hands on the 44x33 sensor from Sony, they did a better job than the other two companies of getting the absolute best ISO performance from it. You can bet they did the same this time with the K1.
If I am wrong, what people are basically saying and what Ricoh is basically doing is selling us the same old tech from 5-7 years ago, rebadged and in a pretty dress and new shoes and we will be lapping it up. I doubt that.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
03-16-2016, 02:34 AM
|
| |
I call "bull" on that statement. If the K1 is cropped to the same res as a lower res sensor (which is the Apsc equal of the FF crop), in post processing, how can that possibly introduce noise. It doesn't.
---------- Post added 03-16-16 at 07:35 PM ----------
Exactly, it's just a crop, no modification of the image whatsoever.
---------- Post added 03-16-16 at 07:39 PM ----------
It won't be the same. If the new K-1 sensor has blistering high ISO performance, which it can be expected to have, it will be better than the K5. Same pixels, same size crop, better technical advancement.
---------- Post added 03-16-16 at 07:41 PM ----------
You are right, a crop is just a crop, it doesn't change a thing about the pixels, if the FF sensor is equal to the scaled up version of the Apsc sensor.
---------- Post added 03-16-16 at 07:42 PM ----------
Same DOF there, no difference.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-11-2016, 10:11 AM
|
| |
A two year old and a five year old that you are managing in a crowded public space? And you expect to change lenses?
Take the 18-135 and forget the rest. Enjoy the trip. Stay on good terms with your wife!
Enjoy!
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-22-2016, 05:22 PM
|
| |
What he said.
:lol:
That is what I was trying to say about the LED panels. .
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
01-21-2016, 04:23 PM
|
| |
Thanks for everyone's suggestions! I ended up with the blue Peak Design strap and I love it! I'm sure I'll pick up an Eddystrap some day, though.
 IMG_1543 by Justin Peacock, on Flickr
 |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-12-2016, 05:08 PM
|
| |
YES YES YES YES YES!!!@#!!@!@!@#!@!@!@#!@# 
BEST PENTAX NEWS IN YEARS!!@#11
..that is.. if Ricoh doesn't renew with that awful place. :lol:
|
