|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
08-12-2018, 10:04 AM
|
| |
Thanks. Gobble, gobble!
Some light dust appeared at the bottom right when I did the test against a white background.
But will dust inside a lens also show up sometimes, too?
Dave
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
08-12-2018, 07:29 AM
|
| |
Okay. I'll try it again. Thank you!
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
08-12-2018, 06:25 AM
|
| |
Thanks. I did it with the lens cap on.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
08-12-2018, 06:18 AM
|
| |
Hello Everybody!
Long time since my last post.
Something came up.
This morning I put my DA 35mm f/2.4 lens on my K-3, and for no particular reason, I ran a sensor dust test. The result was horrendous!
All kinds of huge dust motes, and what looked like long hairs, and odd-shaped debris!
I used the dust removal feature a few times, and I did the test a few more times, but the dust and debris, while it moved around a bit, all but remained. So I made plans on doing a thorough sensor swab some time soon. I was apprehensive, because the last time I did a swabbing was on my Nikon D70 way back in 2005! I made plans to watch a few how-to sensor cleaning videos to prepare myself.
But later on, I switched lenses again. I put the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 on the K-3.
Then, just for the heck of it, I did the exam once again.
NO DUST OR DEBRIS TO BE SEEN! Spotless!
So, if you've read this far, here is my question: Is the dust and debris in the previous exams inside the DA 35mm f/2.4 lens, then?
Is there a way to hold open the DA 35's aperture blades off the camera, for a bright clear view through the lens?
Thanks.
Dave
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
11-12-2016, 07:48 AM
|
| |
Thank you for your thoughts!
Of course I could be wrong, but I do not think trains and planes demand as much from AF as, say, professional basketball, etc., and other such events where you mostly see these big Canon & Nikon rigs as a rule.
I often shoot at ISO 400 and 800 and I wonder if the K-1's FF sensor will provide visibly better IQ straight out of the camera than the K-3 at those sensitivities. But I would be disappointed if even in single AF mode the K-1 balked at those tasks.
Incidentally, it seems like the Canon FF crowd dominates the plane and train photo sites. The FF images do seem "smoother" somehow - in particular the night shots taken presumably at high ISOs. It's hard to describe. I often wonder if I could match the IQ if I was more proficient at PP.
But I enjoy my Pentax DSLRs much more than the Canons I tried.
Maybe I just wannna spend some money on new Pentax gear!
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
11-12-2016, 02:02 AM
|
| |
Thanks for the reply.
The K-5 would sometimes fail to focus on a moving train or plane in single-shot, center-point AF mode, in bright daylight, and I missed the shot. So the move to the K-3 was good for me, IMHO.
I say this humbly, as I am no expert, but I will say that the K-3 has not disappointed me like that.
Certainly could be poor technique on my part. Or maybe it's technical. Subject is going too fast. Or inadequate contrast, like the bright white airliner fuselage. Not sure.
So then maybe I'm not sure what DPReview means by 'hesitation'' too.
Thanks, again.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
11-12-2016, 01:21 AM
|
| |
Hello,
Is there any substance to DPReview's statement in its review of the K-1 which concludes that it suffers from, "Hesitant Single-AF acquisition"?
I do a bit of train and plane "action" photography. I can compromise as far as C-AF performance goes, but the suggestion of single-shot AF hesitation concerns me. Is it true?
If so, then maybe the K-3 is still the best Pentax DSLR for me!
And if not, which Pentax DSLR would you now say provides the fastest and most accurate AF performance?
Thanks.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-23-2016, 08:26 PM
|
| |
UPDATE:
I've just updated the lenses listed in my profile. I was forced to sell quite a few of them when I was laid up from work for a few months with a fairly serious injury (a broken leg). But maybe this is a good thing? BTW I never even got to try out that Sigma 10-20! (It sold for a pretty penny, too, which really helped me out!)
When I speak of image quality, I guess I want my photos to have an equal consistency to that of the top railroad and aviation photographers I see. (I refuse to believe it is because most of them shoot Canon and Nikon!)
What I'd like to see is all the leaves on the trees and all the distant train cars in the scene all being sharp. Or an airliner fuselage looking smooth and glossy, no matter the light - like they really look. Stuff like that.
But part of me says those guys get that quality shooting RAW and doing lots of post processing. I have the software to do that but don't yet know how to achieve the look I'm after, if that's what makes the most difference.
The Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 seems to handle the airplanes pretty well. But I'd like to have a Pentax 60-250 or maybe a 300mm prime instead. I dunno. Brand loyalty, I guess!
I plan to use the wide prime I choose for trains.
So I begin again.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-23-2016, 05:09 PM
|
| |
Hello,
Haven't posted in a while. Guess I been busy trying to learn.
Now I'm reaching the point where I accept that if I want better quality photos I am simply going to have to get higher quality, more expensive lenses. I'm sure that sounds dumb to many of you. Like duh.
For starters I'm looking at the 14mm, HD 15mm, and the 21mm Limited.
Here is my question: Why do we like the 21mm so much? Because it's so small? I'll grant that the small size is appealing. Okay.
But unless I am poorly informed (which is entirely likely) it would seem a max aperture of f/3.2 kind of detracts from its potential versatility.
So far I am leaning towards the HD 15mm, but it's only f/4.
Which brings me to the 14mm...
The option of f/2.8 or even brighter is what we most want, isn't it?
Realizing and accepting that my largely consumer-grade lens kit is holding me back has been a slow process. It has taken time to accept good quality takes added effort and expense, and that I just may have to bring a bunch of primes into the field if I really want outstanding photo quality. The jack-of-all-trades 18-135 WR just won't cut it.
But great lenses mainly cost many more times more than a very decent new or even used camera body.
Look at all the people who poke fun at people who never use any other lens than a 18-55.
But a lucky break on a used Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 some months ago has kind of opened my eyes.
Thanks,
Dave
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
11-02-2015, 10:54 PM
|
| |
Minor issue here. Do you guys often get dust specks on your focusing screen, like all the time?
I just ordered another ML-60 focusing screen. It was $43 from Adorama. Because, once again, I've scratched the focusing screen while trying to clean it, and clean out that whole little K-3 viewfinder chamber above the mirror chamber.
How does Pentax clean cameras when you pay to send it in? Do they have like those sterile, dust-free clean rooms, like in a serious biology lab?
Or does everybody just live with the viewfinder specks? They're definitely not on the mirror or sensor. (BTW The K-3's sensor cleaning system works great - but unfortunatelty is of no help in this matter!)
Can you stick a small narrow vacuum nozzle in the camera? You know, to suck out any ambient dust in the air?
Too bad the little frame that holds the focusing screen in place doesn't have a gasket around it!
Any and all advice welcome!
Dave
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-02-2015, 10:38 PM
|
| |
Thank you for your reply Adam.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-01-2015, 11:31 PM
|
| |
Hi just bought an old but like new D70 so I also bought a Nikon AF 35-70 lens to start out with.
Do I have to change any D70 menu settings or lock the lens aperture ring like when I use older lenses on the K-3?
Anybody remember?
Thanks
Dave
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-04-2015, 09:11 AM
|
| |
It sounds to me like you are a growing photographer and therefore I would go for the best camera you can afford, so that you won't quickly outgrow it!
|
|
Forum: Pentax Compact Cameras
06-04-2015, 09:08 AM
|
| |
I broke my leg, and so was out of work for an extended period, and to make ends meet I had to compromise my collection. Sadly I let the MX-1 go. I sold it on eBay for a ridiculously low price. Like many people I just wish it had a viewfinder, The MX-1 is terribly under-rated. I wonder if there will be a follow-up model.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
04-21-2015, 08:05 AM
|
| |
I would have to agree. I have the iPhone 6.
However, I continue to carry my LF1 all of the time, and my Olympus Stylus 1 quite a bit of the time, because of their zoom capability, and also because, in anything but great light, their image quality remains significantly superior to the iPhone's. And certainly the low light image quality of the relatively small RX100 or LX100 far surpasses any smartphone. (I sold my RX100 though, because of its limited focal length - shame on me!)
Additionally, the iPhone is to me, as an enthusiast, just plain fiddly to use in anything but automatic snapshot mode, a fact which greatly diminishes its appeal. And, though it may be a minor quibble for many, I like the fact that my cameras have viewfinders.
However, if I never had any experience with cameras as we know them I wouldn't know the difference. And this to me is the biggest problem facing camera manufacturers. Camera phones suit the needs of most people, and as their use spreads, they're becoming the only type of camera most people want and use.
Still, I do not see camera phones rendering stand-alone cameras obsolete. They are the Brownies or Instamatics of the present day. And while they have clearly taken the place of simple, lower-end stand-alone cameras, anyone yearning for a more versatile and capable imaging tool never will be content with a smartphone. At least for the time being.
Because who knows? Maybe this new multi-sensor-and-lens technology, or something else like it, will dramatically upset the current status quo even further!
YMMV, of course!
|
|
Forum: General Photography
04-15-2015, 07:37 AM
|
| |
I seek advice regarding the architecture of a more advanced system for storing and backing up my growing collection of images.
At present I use a HP desktop PC with a 1 TB HDD, and a Western Digital external drive that backs up everything on my PC automatically. I just plug it into the PC USB port every so often and it does it thing. The external drive has already saved me twice when my earlier PCs crashed. But the external HDD's capacity is quickly nearing full! One thing I learned is it was making five backup copies of every file. I adjusted it to make three, and that opened up more capacity. Do I even need three on one drive?
I also use Lightroom and Photoshop. I'm stating to wonder if I buy more external drives or some other device, how will Lightroom find stored images I am looking for? How do I configure LR to read any and all additional devices? I guess am not interested in using the cloud.
Right now the PC is up to 800 GB with programs, documents, music, and pictures. The My Pictures folder alone is 300 GB.
I used to store images on data CDs and disks. Some of them became unreadable over time, and I've lost the images forever, as far as I know.
Then I graduated to the external HDD. And it looks like I'm due for an even more advanced storage system now.
Any advice is helpful. I want to design a secure storage and archival system that is fast and easy to access at any time and with an eye on even greater storage needs, of course, as time goes by. And I'd like to keep the cost as modest as possible.
Thank you,
David
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
04-10-2015, 08:08 AM
|
| |
Thanks to everyone for the advice and jokes too. I plugged in the suggested settings. Still on the learning curve.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
04-09-2015, 08:43 AM
|
| |
I should then add to my original post that in particular what I want is to be able to more readily take photos of moving trains under cloudy skies or in fading light, at the lowest possible ISO.
So I figured (with my scant knowledge) that what I want is a fast lens and fast AF. But which focal length? And which lens? The 50 1.8 I got is too long. The 35 2.4 is better. But I believe I need wider. And that's how this started. I thought that the Sigma 30 1.4 might be the low light answer for me.
Now I don't know if I'm on the right course at all!
And even machismo has been brought in to the question!
I have a M 28mm 2.8, but I've never tried it. I didn't think there would be enough time for MF with moving trains.
LOL
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
04-08-2015, 09:01 AM
|
| |
Ever since I got my K-3 I've been shooting RAW+JPG, but mostly using the JPGs. And I must say that, after scrolling through hundreds of images in Lightroom, the RAW version color almost always looks more appealing than my JPEGs!
The JPEGs seem a little washed out in comparison, a bit less saturated. Shouldn't it be the other way around?
What are your preferred K-3 JPEG settings?
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
04-07-2015, 08:30 AM
|
| |
Can a camera's built-in flash ever produce nice, natural looking light, or is the only realistic option the use of external units, spotlights, reflectors, filters, extensive custom white balance readings, etc.? (forgive my possible mistakes with terminology!)
I mean, if that's the case, so be it. I was just wondering. Because I can't ever remember being happy with the results I get from any camera's built-in flash unit, and only on rare occasions with an external flash, either. But when I've taken the time to set up lamps that emit steady light, I have gotten okay and even pretty good results, even with very DIY no-cost primitive set-ups! It just seems like steady light works better.
Any and all advice, samples, and discussion welcome!
Thank you,
Dave
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
04-04-2015, 12:41 PM
|
| |
I was reading the staff review of the Sigma 30mm 1.4 DC HSM "Art" lens this morning, and it seemed like it would be a really great lens, until the reviewer described its autofocus speed as "sluggish". I believe it was tested with a K-3.
The three most important selling points that interest me are sharpness, autofocus speed, and a broad aperture range.
So I am wondering, instead of reading seven or ten reviews, what lens would you say, zoom or prime, from any maker, covering anywhere between 15mm and 35mm, would focus fastest on the K-3, give impressively sharp results, and provide the creative flexibility of a wide aperture range?
Thanks!
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
04-04-2015, 10:51 AM
|
| |
Witamy na forum Pentaxa. Lubię swój portret. Czarno-biały jest dramatyczna. Lubię też drzewa. Mocne kolory i szczegóły!
|
|
Forum: Site Suggestions and Help
03-28-2015, 09:39 PM
|
| |
Yes I had to reload the page 2x to clear your one single reply.
---------- Post added 03-29-15 at 12:40 AM ----------
test test
|
|
Forum: Site Suggestions and Help
03-28-2015, 09:17 PM
|
| |
Here is an example of a screenshot taken just after I posted one Quick Reply in the Aviation Group. Just a minor quibble. Like you said it is a Quick Reply. I have to check if it also does this when I start a new thread for example or post in someone else's thread. Even so. No biggie through. Thanks for answering.
 |
