|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-14-2009, 05:27 AM
|
| |
Well me widget arrived from Flash Zebra today and I've got to say its exactly what I need. Such a basic simple design and I'm frankly amazed no-one else offers anything similar. Cheap too.
Thanks for recommendation Woof and thanks to Flash Zebra.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-05-2009, 02:52 PM
|
| |
Thanks folks, went for the Flashzebra option as haven't got any dead leads about the place. The FZ widget looks just the job.
Cheers
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-05-2009, 10:13 AM
|
| |
I've just got the Samsung equivalent to the Pentax AF360 flash and I'm keen to use its wireless capabilities.
Trouble is I'm struggling to find a way to mount the flash unit. Only thing I've found is the Pentax flash stand which will do but I was hoping I'd be able to get something to mount it to a standard tripod screw mount.
Anybody got any ideas?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-20-2008, 06:40 PM
|
| |
I'd also put my vote in for the A 70-210mm f4 with its constant apertre and wide open sharpness. Also big fan of my M100mm f2.8 and my latest fave my very cheaply obtained K200mm f4.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-26-2008, 09:13 AM
|
| |
A fisheye and rectilinear wide angle are very, very different types of lenses, your choice depends very much on the type of photography you want to do. I would strongly advise getting the rectilinear 12-24mm if you can only afford one, its much more versatile, any fisheye is much more of a specialist lens, I'd go so far as to say a bit of a luxury if money is tight.
I second the recommendation to have a look at the Sigma 10-20mm, I've got one, it does the job admirably and is as wide as you're ever going to get. That upcoming Tamron sounds good too, depends whether you can wait or not.
One last thing, worth considering the Samsung versions of the 10-17 FE and 12-24, as far as I know they are exactly the same lenses as their Pentax equivalents just a dfferent label, but usually considerably cheaper. I've got the Samsung 10-17mm and its great, saved about 20% over the Pentax version.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-29-2008, 03:13 PM
|
| |
They use a pair of mirrors, facing each other which fold the light back and forth and magnify it, in a similar way to a telescope. There are a couple of issues, they are all fixed aperture, usually f/8, and one of the mirrors is necessarily mounted in the front element. When its focused on a subject, this doesn't matter as the mirrors focus the light in such a way as to make a complete image, however, if out of focus the secondary mirror gets in the way creating a dark round shadow in the middle. This is what causes the characteristic doughnut shaped out of focus highlights.
The upside is you can get silly focal lengths in a much smaller and lighter package and for a fraction of the price of a conventianal prime or zoom.
I've got a Sigma 600mm f/8 and its pretty good. When I was thinking of buying it I did some research and a few said it was the best mirror lens out there. I can't verify that as its the only one I've ever used.
There's a dedicated flickr group which might be worth a look
Flickr: Mirror Reflex Lens |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-29-2008, 03:01 PM
|
| |
My experience is the same as NaCl's, there is some CA there but its pretty minor.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-15-2008, 02:25 PM
|
| |
Yeah, there are 3 tiny cross head screws accessible on the barrel, right next to the mount section. Shall have to go and buy myself a little screwdriver tomorrow. Sounds like it isn't terminally cream crackered at least so won't need to send it back. Cheers all.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-15-2008, 01:39 PM
|
| |
Just got one of these off the 'bay, seems to make lovely pics from the handful of test shots I've taken so far.
BUT, there seems to be some rather alarming sounding wobble centred around where the main part of the body is attached to the aperture ring/mount section. Its more audible than feelable (is that a word?) and like I say, pic quality seems unaffected.
Is this a problem or is it just the kind of thing you expect from a 20+ year old lens?
Thanks in advance for any wisdom.
Oh, and hi by the way, I'm new :D
|
