|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
06-14-2018, 07:35 AM
|
| |
At least the seller is being honest. "Fungus" is mentioned 4 times in the listing, and the photos show the problem is widespread not just a little spot. I wonder how many elements are damaged.
Anyone who spends $5000 on that is a gambler.
---------- Post added 06-14-18 at 10:47 AM ----------
This $40 storage box can likely fit that lens. Add a large desiccant pack for an inexpensive storage solution.
Clear Weathertight Trunk | The Container Store |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-14-2016, 08:36 AM
|
| |
Amazing how to make a "sports lens" which is really just the equivalent of what all the big manufacturers do in their top of the line lenses, Sigma had to double the price and essentially design a whole new lens. If you need any further proof lenses like the 150-450 are worth the money, I don't know what it would be. And if you need any further proof the bargain basement Tamron and Sigma lenses are a long way from top quality, I don't know what that would be either.
Before Sigma attempted to produce an actual high end lens, people were free to assume they were as good as anything else only cheaper. Now, it turns out even the optical formula of the Sigma 150-600 needed improvement. That's shocking even to me. I always assumed they were just good glass is cheaper, less durable cases. I've been giving them undue credit.
It turns out to make these long cheaper lenses, they've been cutting corners in both barrel construction, and optical design in some cases.
It still doesn't mean they aren't a good deal for the casual shooter. They just aren't in the same class as a lens like the 150-450. That's disappointing for the folks who after all these years, still believe there's a free lunch some where other than the closest Sikh temple.
There's nothing wrong with being a casual shooter....I shot with a Sigma 70-300 for years. You just get to the point where you want better, or just get tired of paying the price.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-13-2016, 04:28 PM
|
| |
Well, Tony Northrup made a video posted on youtube here
You Tube
|
src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1fmMG5jgDwk?controls=1" allowfullscreen>
|
where he compares the 150-600s on 5DIII to Canon 400mm prime on crop; and submitted images for vote to his community. He concludes: 400mm Canon cropped is sharper than the 600mm on full frame. Also, he mentions that there is not gain of resolution between 500mm and 600mm, meaning that the sharpness drops as fast as the magnification, so there is not benefit of using the 600mm instead of 500mm.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-05-2016, 09:45 AM
|
| |
I don't have pics of birds "spitting from behind" and I was using (and still do) the Bigma 50-500 latest OS version for many years (which still is around $1300 new here). I can tell you that the DFA 150-450 is a great lens and it delivers even on older Pentax cameras like my beloved K-5IIs.
_RED1492 | Redpit | Flickr
That is what counts after all. I wanted a great zoom from Pentax with very good IQ - better than my Bigma and that is the DFA. If you want something cheaper there is always the DA 55-300 and the Bigma or the Sigma 150-500 you can find used quite cheap. Until Pentax gives us something new or Sigma-Tamron decide to support K-mount again these are your options.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-03-2016, 03:32 PM
|
| |
Got my Metz 26AF-2 today, and as someone who mainly uses flash for fill, it is everything I hoped for and a lot more. I am trying to create a lightweight and diminutive kit for my K-1, and this flash fits that concept perfectly. It is so compact it can almost stay on the camera unnoticed, but it's capable too with the ability for angled shots and a pretty quick recharge. Personally I love it that it only requires two AAA batteries. What a beauty for $135.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-03-2016, 07:35 AM
|
| |
I'd like to see a comparison between a 610 and 150-600 and a K-3 and 150-450, which ends up being a good lens or good body kind of comparison.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-03-2016, 05:47 AM
|
| |
I find I must agree
with half the zoom and twice the crap
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-02-2016, 12:52 PM
|
| |
The DFA150-450 can be had for less than $2000, is in the same price range as the Canon 100-400, not far priced from the Sigma 150-600 S or Nikon 200-500.
My comment on the choice of lenses for birding:
- no one needs a zoom for birding; a sharp prime is a better choice (lighter and sharper to give more room to crop)
- long lenses aren't cheap or aren't sharp or aren't fast
Cheap ways to get access to long lenses:
- rent (wildlife presence is seasonal, makes not sense to own expensive supertele lenses)
- manual focus lens from the 80s
In the same league is the Sigma 50-500 available in k mount.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-02-2016, 01:39 PM
|
| |
If so, that has been remedied by this purchase!:D I just decided that you only live once and bought the 150-450 and the FA31mm...:eek: And I can use the zoom for a video project I've been asked to shoot. The weather protection is a very welcome bonus since it is a landscape and nature documentary (and fits my general preferences for outdoor photography). And that the lens costs more then the K-1 is not a very convincing argument for me. Camerabody's come and go, but a lens can be used again and again and again....
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-15-2015, 08:01 AM
|
| |
Agree. If the news gets any slower here I might have to go out and actually take pictures...................
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-14-2015, 06:00 PM
|
| |
People make similar cracks about Fuji,Olympus and Leica. pay them no mind.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
12-12-2015, 01:47 PM
|
| |
As with many things... even when governments do enact the laws. There is no enforcement enabling monetary support. When they passed similar legislation on another issue, the RCMP said "we can't afford to use the criminal code tools we already have, giving us more responsibility isn't going to help that, without new funding". And this is what is so wrong with monopoly capitalism. The goal is not success through excellence, the goal is success through monopoly practices.
When ever they think of a new social program that could help disadvantaged kids, they always ask "who is going to pay for this." When someone proposes new copyright laws, no one ever says "who's going to pay for this?" as if there are going to be no enforcement costs. It's absolute hypocrisy. It's simple, these laws are a drain on all other tax payer funded programs. They are a subsidy for the big companies that ask for them to be implemented. It's just handing them tax payer dollars. In our society, while that's not ok to do things that help the citizen population, it's quite acceptable to use big bucks to lobby for tax subsidies if you're a large corporation.
They shoud receive absolutely no tax deductions for lobbyists, in fact whatever they pay trying to get favourable legislation passed, they should have to put up the same amount into a fund for the competing public defence. It costs a lot of tax payer money to investigate and evaluate these get rich quick schemes. The tax payer shouldn't be paying that. The companies who want the changes should be paying the whole shot, lobby, and counter lobby, and no legislation for any industry should be undertaken without a funding model, paid for by the industry in question. If the movie industry wants tougher copyright laws, they should accept higher taxes on their product to pay the costs of added enforcement. That shouldn't be shared by those of us who think they make enough money as it is.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
12-07-2015, 09:39 AM
|
| |
+1
PP will never turn a bad photo into a good one, and certainly not in an oustanding one. As in other things, with PP it's garbage in, garbage out...
Don't forget that PP on a good photo could also go both way: it can improve what is already there but can also waste the picture if one doesn't have a clue on what he's doing or without a specific goal in mind...
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-30-2015, 12:27 AM
|
| |
Because they think rather than they do.
They live increasingly under the influence of our so common, so invasive and so dangerous abstractive world.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
09-19-2015, 08:33 AM
|
| |
...and a black marker pen? :confused:
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-09-2015, 05:24 PM
|
| |
Back in the days of the K-5 roaming the Earth as the tyrannosaurus rex of the APS-C world, Pentaxians loved DXO for giving the K-5's sensor the edge over every other.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
11-10-2015, 11:54 AM
|
| |
With K-01 and SMC Pentax-A 50mm F2.8 Macro @f5.6,ISO100,1/3sec, tripod.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-10-2015, 11:39 AM
|
| |
The primary reason for introducing car bodies that dent easily was to protect the occupants with a "crumple zone" that absorbed some of the energy of a collision. In the old days, the car didn't dent as much, so the occupants crumpled instead.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-02-2015, 04:04 AM
|
| |
Hello,
CIPA published their usual production/shipment data for September. Despite claims that DSLRs are being replaced by MILCs, smartphones, kitchen owens and whatever, the DSLR production figures show an increase (while the MILCs declined).
For the entire year, the DSLRs could have a slight decline in units but an increase in value (as shipment figures should follow the production ones). We have 3 months of data which could change things one way or another, though.
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201509_e.pdf
I'd say Ricoh Imaging was right to think the DSLR market will stabilize (that was back when MILCs were "gaining" rapidly). It also means the decision to make the K-mount FF DSLR is not that crazy; it's still simultaneously serving the much larger market and their loyal user base i.e. us. A win-win scenario.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-31-2015, 08:38 PM
|
| |
GoPro seems to suffer from a problem similar to Nikon. They overestimated sales, overbuilt capacity, over-produced and when sales (for Christmas, as management just revealed) slowed (because the fad has passed and the next generation of toy is drones) inventory rapidly built. Now they're slashing prices to clear stock, further impinging Gross Revenue.
It probably isn't a death spiral - they'll retrench and remarket (their target customer age will rise) but good luck owning the stock for a while.
Ricoh Imaging is fine. Corporate isn't closing the door. They're not going away, much as a few people on here seem to wish they would.
|
