|
Forum: General Talk
01-29-2015, 02:48 PM
|
| |
I have sold and shipped internationally on ebay for many years. I'll share what I have learned. I never use the new eBay shipping program. I used it once and it took more time and effort than just doing it myself, not worth the hassle. I can't see that they add any value to the customer either, they charge extra fees.
After some bad experiences, I will only sell to certain countries: Canada, Western Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. I may refuse to ship to a customer whose feedback shows a bad history, but that is true in the US too. I pack the same way as for domestic shipments; the only extra effort is to fill out the Customs Declaration online, but that's not excessive paperwork or time. It adds a few sales on high end items, so it's worth it.
I only ship by Priority Express international with full insurance and signature required, which is expensive but worth it. Without a signature on delivery, you don't get blanket protection from ebay's seller protection. You only get the signature with Express, and the buyer pays shipping so I play it safe. I never use UPS, FedEx or DHL for international shipping because they use customs brokers who add fees. That's what works for me.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-29-2015, 07:49 AM
|
| |
No, It probably will not work and may freeze the camera temporarily. Nikon uses iTTL, a serial digital communication protocol with the flash, and it uses the pins on the flash differently than before.
In particular they put data on the former SP pin, the one closest to the front of the camera. Strobes usually pull that up when a strobe is present, colliding with the data on the pin from the camera. This confuses the camera.
The easy fix is to tape over all the pins except the center trigger pin. It will work manual then.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-27-2015, 02:57 PM
|
| |
I second this idea. The ignorant customer won't even know. Paste on a Canon or Nikon logo...
Evidently your wife is getting good shots of the weddings. That should be all that counts, but... it's not. People want brand names with status. If your income is important, you have to follow customer wishes, right or wrong. It's just business.
I'm not knocking either Canon or Nikon. I've shot weddings with both. The big advantage is full frame, for wide angle and supposedly bigger enlargements. This is a logical reason to go to one or the other's full frame line. I could argue that there are wonderful wide angle lenses for Pentax, and that sensor resolutions have increased to the point where full frame has less advantage for enlargements. I think that's true, but do customers? No, sadly.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
01-26-2015, 04:58 PM
|
| |
Sears lenses are ignored and forgotten by most photographers. It's hard to imagine that Sears sold credible photo products, but surprisingly Sears did. Their lenses were simply rebranded lenses from major high quality makers of the day. Now these old lenses are much underrated. If you compare a lens branded by its original lens maker to the Sears rebranded lens, the original has a much higher price and perhaps higher prestige. I have never noticed that prestige made better photographs so I'm content with the bargain priced Sears lens.
As an example I cite the Sears Sekor 28mm 2.8 M42 lens, made by Mamiya. The Mamiya 28 2.8 M42 lens is optically identical, yet more highly regarded and more expensive too. Both are fine lenses and shoot great pictures on digital cameras. They have great optics and build quality, lack modern multi coating, but deliver images with a certain character that I enjoy. The Sears 50/2 is remarkably sharp and incredibly cheap. The 135 2.8 Macro lens has a unique soft flaring in the macro mode that makes special images. The Sears 60-300 and 80-200 zooms are dependable yet sell for almost nothing. I've had some fun with these, and it's made me reconsider the line.
Lately I have been wondering, who originally made this old Sears lens? A lot of the older m42 lenses were very good, apparently made by Mamiya or Tomioka. I know Mamiya made the TLS 1000 bodies and supplied the M42 lenses for those, and probably other M42 bodies. Ricoh apparently made many of the K bodies and lenses, and the Japanese K mount lenses seem to come from either Ricoh or Chinon. There may be additional suppliers. Possibly the Sears Japanese 60-300 zoom was made by Tokina, but it could have been Ricoh, not sure. The Korean K mount lenses seem to be mostly made by Samyang. Out of curiosity I'm assembling a sort of genealogy of Sears lenses and would appreciate your insights. I'm doing a spreadsheet to keep it all straight, but I have not figured out how to share that. Anyway, If you know the maker, let us know..
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
01-26-2015, 07:32 AM
|
| |
I don't know where to post this so move it as appropriate, or just pick out the websites and add them above, whatever.
One topic that comes up over and over is using enlarger lenses for macro. Brilliant idea, but it takes various adapters, rings, caps, elbow grease and duct tape to do it. It can be fun to do, but it's also reinventing the wheel. There are off the shelf solutions.
A German company makes adapters for enlarger lenses (which tend to have non-standard threads, like 40.5x0.5mm on Nikkors). He makes them with 3 camera mount threads, either M39, M42, or T2, which lets you mount on just about any camera with an added camera specific adapter. It's the enlarger lens front thread that is tough to find, and here they are:
Reverse adapters for enlarging lenses
On the The MFlenses forum there is a high quality kit of adapters, rings and tubes developed for using all sorts of enlarger lenses on M43 and Sony mirrorless cameras, as well as Sony SLRs. So here it is:
The VNEX enlarger lens project V2.0 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-24-2015, 10:15 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-23-2015, 06:31 PM
|
| |
The mod requires removing metal from the leading edges of all three mounting flanges and also shaving down the step ring on the mount. It is best to have an old camera mount or an extension ring handy so you can insert the lens and see what interferes. I use the lens mount from a dead Pentax A3000. It's not difficult, but is tedious getting the step ring down to size because there is a lot of brass to remove.
Ideally this would be done on a metal lathe. I started with a thin hand file from a needle file set and that got so old so fast. Dremel with the 426 bit that RioRico recomienda. The ML50 1.9 is hardly worth doing, but the ML50/1.4 and ML28/2.8 are good.
In the end, you can pick up an M42 DS Yashinon lens for less money, so ... what the heck are we doing this for? I guess if you already have the lenses, it might make sense.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
01-23-2015, 03:38 PM
|
| |
This 92/2 conversion looks so professional, not like a Frankenlens at all. Nice job. Using the Chinese helicoid makes sense. Was it 58mm diameter or 42 or 52? And maybe a 30-90 extension?
I want to put a few projector lenses in some sort of mount. I'm thinking I'l cannibalize some junker long zooms -- keep the A-mount, the aperture and use the zoom mechanism for focus. Maybe pull the existing optics (or leave rear group), since I'm mainly interested in the projector lens performance. Seems like they were made for macro.
I'm not interested in reinventing the basics like mount and focus movement if this will work. And I can solve my guilt problem over not fixing these junkers that I'll never use anyway.
Am I too lazy? Any comments on my wild ideas are welcome. Anyway, I have two nice projector lenses in my parts bin, a Minolta P-Rokkor 100/2.8 and a Leitz Colorplan 90/2.5. So this gave me the push to get it done. More later..
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-23-2015, 07:13 AM
|
| |
This has the full lens mount on it, from a camera front. Somebody's camera is ripped apart, not your problem. It was done cleanly, so perhaps the mirror box is plastic? The camera mount should spin right off, but it hasn't and I'm sure previous owner tried. There must be a pin or lever that is binding it in place. The lock pin, which is near the 2 in the previous post, is missing, so that's not the holdup, but look around there closely to be sure. It may be on the black ring, perhaps a catch that is touching a screw that you can unscrew? I'm thinking that the catch for an M42 to K mount is the culprit, since that's the other locking mechanism on this mount. Look inside a camera body to get the lay of the land. This would be so easy if it were in my hands.
Once you free it, you will have to check the lens carefully for collateral damage. This was pulled out of a camera's mirror box, and that took major impact.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
01-22-2015, 06:32 PM
|
| |
The couple already paid $6000, what's with this fee for a cover? It's such an obvious and tacky gouge. But now the photographer has lost good will in the community, thanks to the negative publicity. That will cost her much more than the fee for the cover.
The photographer goofed. She should give the album cover and a gift certificate for some free enlargements to make amends. But the word is out and it may be too late. Bad news travels fast, and in this case, worldwide.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
01-22-2015, 06:12 PM
|
| |
I love that your wife fiddled with the adapter to get it off when it balked for you. Great story. Women have more patience -- men are tempted to brute force things and sometimes that's not the answer. I could seldom find the removal tool so used a tiny screwdriver to release it. They're a nuisance but needed for infinity focus, so I guess I am stuck.
I use a lot of these rings on all the M42 lenses, so I take off the retaining spring before installation. I can't be bothered with the tool, and the tiny screw on the clip is famous for either working out or scraping the threads of the M42 lens if it's a tad long. No precision in these. Without the spring clip, my concern is that I might twist the lens off when changing aperture/focus, so on my TO DO list is drilling a slot for the lock pin on those lens that are wide enough. Many are not, they are beveled up from the mount and can't lock. So far, no big problem with lenses spinning off, but I'm watchful.
The real Pentax adapters might be better made, but at $50 they are not in my budget.
Pentax Adapter B - Adapts Pentax K Bodies to Screw Mount Lenses 30120
Pentax Mount Adapter K 30120 B&H Photo Video
What I really want is a cheap source of the flanged adapters. Most are in the $20 range, compared to the cheap ones around $7.
Kipon Lens Mount Adapter from Pentax Screw M42 To Pentax/K Body - (With Inner Ring)
General Brand Pentax-K Body to Universal Lens Adapter ABPKS B&H
I like to have an adapter on each lens, so I use a bunch. As it is now, certain lenses that lack the A/M lever won't retract the aperture pin and that hangs on the power zoom contacts in the camera (I think that's where). So, got to do surgery on the lens to remove the pin, silly. But the old lenses are well worth the effort, so just consider this letting off steam.... It's getting to be automatic, kind of like removing the Ricoh pin on the KR mount lenses.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-21-2015, 10:10 AM
|
| |
I have the AF500FTZ and use it on a K10D. It works well as a manual flash and does coordinate somewhat with the camera, setting flash zoom to follow the lens. I knew this was not a digital PTTL flash, so did not expect much but it vastly exceeded my hopes. A great budget flash with high power, bounce, swivel and partial compatibility. For $30, I Can't complain.
No, I don't know about compatibility with the 645 version you have. It sounds like it varies by exact 645 version - yes for the N, ?? for older. It's old, so support will be weak. Unless some good soul here has direct experience, I doubt you can find a specific answer Your best bet is to get one and try it. If you lurk a bit on ebay, you'll find one cheap and it's a no brainer to try it - and dump it later if it's a no go. Barring that, the AF280T is just as good, except for lower guide number, and you know it's fully compatible.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-21-2015, 09:49 AM
|
| |
I was curious about this so I dug around on the Nikon USA site for more info. Apparently on some D750 bodies there is excessive flare from the top of the frame if a bright light is there. Sounds like Nikon is addressing the problem as they should. Free fix, if your camera is affected. Their prices are high, but their support is solid.
https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/19336 |
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-20-2015, 08:21 PM
|
| |
Sounds like a bad card or firmware issue with the K3, but I'm just guessing. Try an EYE Fi card to see if that works.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-20-2015, 01:58 PM
|
| |
You do not use any oily lube on the blades of an aperture ring. If there is grease it leaked there from somewhere else in the lens, usually the helicoid grease when the lens got hot. Then it seems to want to travel on the edges of the blades to the middle and make the thing stick. Cleaning it is more of an access challenge than anything else. Some lenses have loctite on the screws and just don't want to come out. For sure use precision JIS screwdrivers to avoid camming out and stripping the heads.
To get the old grease off, I try to access the aperture from both sides by removing optics in the way. Then gently rub it with a Q tip with solvent, which gets most of it. If its deep in, I use medical swabs, basically long Q Tips. Do both sides, over and over. You can use powdered graphite dissolved in alcohol as a paint on dry lube, but very sparingly. This works 90% of the time to free the blades.
Otherwise you have to remove and disassemble the aperture ring. You clean the blades in an ultrasonic cleaner and re-assemble. They are fragile and easily bent, so this demands great care. Once you get it back together, inserting it can be tricky. I use double sided tape on the end of a rod to drop it back in. Sometimes I tighten the springs to make it snap, because they seem weak after decades. Every aperture is a little different so this is just general advice.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
01-20-2015, 11:30 AM
|
| |
If you are considering going from Nikon to Pentax. know that all Nikon lenses can mount on Pentax using adapters. Might make your move less heart-rending.
There are two kinds of lens adapters: without glass (macro only) and with glass. Cost is $15-30. The macro ones don't affect the optical quality, but do prevent infinity focus. The ones with glass act as a 1.4x teleconverter, and keep infinity focus. It's cheap glass, so there is some impact on image quality that is acceptable to most people, not all. You can use all your Nikon glass, but the G lenses which lack aperture rings would be wide open. I have both macro and glassed Nikon lens adapters for Pentax K, and yep, they work well.
I also have them for MD, FD, and Konica AR, but that's another story. It's a neat trick to use the orphan lenses on a modern body.
There is also a really clever product called MultiMount that I don't see people using much, but it is very very interesting. Instead of a lens adapter, it is a replacement camera lens mount. You swap it onto your Pentax camera body and suddenly you can mount and use Nikon and Olympus lenses, with no lens modifications (need a thin shim for Nikons). You can also mount pentax, of course, with no changes. You can also mount Konica lenses but they focus macro only. You can possibly mount Y/C lenses with mods, to remove protruding stuff. This is all possible because the lens register distances for Nikon and Olympus (46.5mm and 46mm) are very slightly longer than for Pentax (45.5mm), so you keep infinity focus. Actually they focus a little beyond infinity, and the minimum focus distance is a tad longer.
This costs' $100 for non WR version, 117 for WR version. See it here:
Pentax K+ Multi-Mount (WR version) - Adaptist
I want one but I have not gotten around to ordering. I'm a little cautious about playing with my camera. I can hack lenses all day, but I don't want to break my old friend.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-20-2015, 10:41 AM
|
| |
Return it to the seller. Ebay backs the buyer in these cases.
If you make a "Request" to ebay and say the reason is "not as described", and you "can't work it out with the seller", ebay will email you a prepaid mailing label for return and refund your full purchase price and shipping. Costs you nothing, except the effort to pack and ship. Better than letting this gnaw at you.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
01-20-2015, 09:49 AM
|
| |
Whoa, back the truck up here. You don't need a megabucks lens to do macro -- you can work with what you already have.
Here are cheap and easy ways to start macro that don't require big $. The first is simply a close up filter / filters ($10+). Put this on the lens you have and you will instantly focus more closely. Even a +1 or +2 close up filter does a lot. Try it out before you plunk down the bucks for mega macro lenses. Get your feet wet with close up filters. The price I mentioned is for single element filters that are sharp in the middle, but slightly soft at the edges. There are some very high quality achromatic close up filters that are superb, but more than the $10 I mentioned. You can go that route later, if close up filters appeal. Close up filters take no space, so always carry a set in the field,
The second low cost option is an extension ring. Once again this gets you closer too, using your regular lens. I like one with A contacts, which I make from a cheap 2x teleconverter by unscrewing the optics ($10+). Again, cheap, compact, easy to stuff in the camera bag for occasional use.
To make a short focal length lens longer, you can also screw on a front converter. I know nobody likes these because they think point and shoot, low quality. Partly true, but not always. There are good quality ones from the major camera vendors like Canon, Nikon and Olympus (and from lens maker Raynox) that work so well. They get closer, and don't cost you light the way a rear converter or extension ring does. Again, you leverage your existing lens and the investment is modest.
You will find that auto focus gets in the way for macro. The camera does not know the right point to focus on, so you need to take control with manual focus. To help with manual focus, you want to change the viewfinder screen in your camera to one with split image microprism. These are cheap on ebay ($30+) but mandatory for manual focus. The best are KatzEye, but they cost upwards of $200, well worth it if you manual focus a lot but hard to swallow at first. Search the forum for this topic to see what I am talking about
All that said, for a first real macro lens on a budget I suggest the 100mm 3.5 lens that people already mentioned. It's good, and it's cheap. They are branded Vivitar, Phoenix, Promaster, Cosina, but they are all the same (Pentax even rebranded one and sold it as Pentax, tells you something). Be sure to get the macro close up filter that comes with the lens if you buy used (often missing).
That's another perspective, for macro on the cheap. I like to start simply, walk before you run.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
01-19-2015, 06:16 PM
|
| |
I have shot many weddings. It got easier, and I got better with practice. I understand the emotion though. Think positive. You'll do a great job and they will treasure the pictures.
Here are some thoughts. Plan the shoot, depending on the wedding venue, the ceremony and the couple and guests. Have the right gear for the event. You'll be shooting the wedding itself, and the reception candids. You probably will stage some re-enactments afterward to get the ring exchange, the vows, the kiss, the entrance and exit, the ring hands, and family groups, signing the license and so on. For the group shots, you have to manage the crowd, tell jokes, be a little bossy but get the poses you think the couple and family would want. Once you have things planned, you know what gear you need. Probably a fast wide zoom and a fast long zoom on two bodies, multiple flashes on radio remotes on umbrella stands, and multiples of every critical item, from cameras to batteries to memory cards. Have a helper, for security and to be where you aren't.
Help the couple to crowd source the photos of all attendees, but to the couple, not to you, stay out of that. At the reception, get candids of all guests especially dear relatives and children. Get the usual standard shots, the entrance, the dance, the toasting, cutting the cake, face planting the cake, the garter and bouquet toss. Cliches, but people love them.
I deliver all the usable pictures on a DVD and I'm done. Let the couple pick and choose and make enlargements. I try to avoid photoshopping the lot, because it's so much time and effort. This is not a money maker for me, in fact it's hard work for intangible rewards. But if you have the skill and equipment needed to bring the couple some happiness, it can feel very right.
.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
01-19-2015, 02:59 AM
|
| |
As others say, the older ring flash is compatible with your camera in the sense of not harming it with too high a trigger voltage. Whether it would work well depends on many factors, especially distance to subject. It would operate manually, so you have limited control and it might perhaps be too bright for close subjects, closer than say 1 foot. You may have to reduce aperture and ISO to get good exposures. In a pinch, you can physically block light from the flash using crude masks taped on. Frankly, there is no need to pay for the Pentax brand, since you are going manual. A Sunpak DX 8R would suit just as well, and has more manual adjustment range and lower price.
Don't be too disappointed that you cannot use PTTL or autofocus. I find that for macro, manual focusing and lighting tend to work better. Too often PTTL can't figure out the right lighting, and the autofocus sometimes picks the wrong point of focus, so it's better with just manual everything, for me.
For more distant subjects, traditional flashes may work well and you may already have the right stuff. Taping on a diffuser will usually tame the hot spots sufficiently for your existing flash to work well. Don't be afraid to improvise -- check this out: http://i1318.photobucket.com/albums/t654/mek1011/IMGP0245_zpsb87a2ee2.jpg
You might want to consider the newer LED type ring flashes, which are brand universal, but low powered - not necessarily a bad thing for close subjects. They are so cheap (~$30) that you can't go wrong. If you want more light, the Aputure 100 has about double the amount of the smaller LED ring flashes, as a modest price premium (~$50).
If you absolutely want a PTTL ring flash, I believe the Sigma EM-140 Pentax version does it. Again, I'm not sold on PTTL especially for macro, but that is a PTTL option for ring flash.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-12-2015, 10:52 PM
|
| |
I guess I'll have to get some V6s and play.
Going off on a tangent, it sounds like the V6 relay mode is really handy. Another idea, using a hybrid V6/v5 setup: Forget about HSS and HyperSync for the moment. Let's say we just want to use 1/180 shutter speed. In relay mode, the V6 has to be both receiver and transmitter, the receiver to get the remote shutter release signal, and the transmitter to tell the remote flash to fire. I wonder if I could use a couple of V5s, one as a transmitter to the V6 which is in Relay, and one as a receiver on the remote flash? Granted the V5s lack the elegance and versatility of the V6, can they be teamed with the V6 like that? I assume the V5s must be on separate channels, so that would have to be set up too. Would that work?
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-12-2015, 12:56 PM
|
| |
Duhh... I did not realize the V6 had the "Relay" function. Sweet. It seems to do what we want automatically for Hypersync and HSS without worrying about setting up a shutter lag delay. I just read the online manual and it's clear enough on relay basics, but Pentax has some quirks so I want to follow up.
Pentax DSLRs trigger a flash as I would expect for shutter speeds up to 1/180th. However, Pentax DSLRs will NOT trigger flash above 1/180th shutter speed, unless an attached flash is HSS-enabled. Apparently the Pentax DSLR somehow reads the flash to know if HSS is enabled, then enables flash triggering.
So, how does it work, in detail? Does the V6 simulate an HSS-enabled flash, so the camera triggers flash via the trigger pin on fast shutter speeds ? Or is there some more complex digital dialog between the camera and V6 to trigger flash? I want to know the gory details for fear there is a gotcha that might prevent something from working.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-10-2015, 09:24 AM
|
| |
Ahh.. the camera shutter lag is too long for this simple implementation to work. Yes, I would be interested in whether the V6 delay function would compensate reliably for shutter lag. I always prefer to buy the latest --- that way instead of being obsolete next week, it's obsolete in two weeks.
Let's assume the camera is shooting in Manual exposure/manual focus, using JPEG only and not firing too often. That should keep shutter lag more consistent. I'm curious if this concept of achieving "HyperSync" can be implemented using V6s, and of course how many? Or maybe the camera could see an attached V6 as HSS capable by itself, without a flash installed? I'm going to have to read your detailed review of the V6 carefully.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-09-2015, 06:38 PM
|
| |
The Pentax AF200FG is quite similar to the Nikon SB-400 in size and features. It does PTTL exposure, but does not have certain advanced features such as HSS and wireless operation. Check the reviews, it's right there. Unlike the Nikon, which typically sells upwards of $250 new/$150 used, it sells for $80 new. I got mine used for $30. You can't beat the great value and pocketable size.
There are some older Pentax flashes that work in manual mode with digitals that might serve too. The AF200T (tiny) or AF280T (tilts and swivels) are good.
|
