|
Forum: Pentax Compact Cameras
02-24-2013, 08:58 PM
|
| |
I had an old point and shoot that I dropped on its lens. After that, most pictures came out looking something like what you have above. Not sure how to explain a camera that only does that intermittently.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
01-27-2013, 11:51 AM
|
| |
Thank you for the comments dcshooter (who must be my neighbor) and wiseox!
Pending payment at this point. I will pull the ad when payment arrives or post again letting folks know it is still available.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
01-26-2013, 11:44 AM
|
| |
Price Just reduced from 300 to 275.
Would be open to a reasonable offer as well. This really is a fantastic little telephoto that happens to be not much bigger than a 50mm.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
01-21-2013, 08:08 PM
|
| |
PentaxForums.com Marketplace Listing
Item for Sale
FA 135 - Lens elements in great shape!
Asking Price
275.00 USD
Item Location
Virginia (United States)
Item Description
FA 135 lens for sale.
I bought this lens several years ago from Pentaxforums user Frank. It has been a great addition to my Pentax gear, but I find that I'm shooting my Canon equipment more often these days. I don't believe a good lens should sit on a shelf when someone else might like to use it.
The exterior of the lens looks ugly. There is some sort of coating on the finish that is partially worn off. I don't know what the finish is, and can't speculate what may have caused this. It was like this when I got it. I can, however, easily vouch for the lens still working like a champ and the front and rear elements are in fantastic shape.
Everything works as it should. Focus is very quick, images are sharp @ 2.8, and no issues with the aperture blades. This is a lightweight little gem with its own built in lens hood. The equivalent of 200mm with F2.8 speed in such a small package is an absolute treat.
It will ship with front and rear caps only. I have no box or lens case for it.
Are you the original owner of the item being sold?
No
Are you selling or trading this item?
Selling
Item Condition (Key)
Used
Good
Shipping Destinations
United States
Shipping Charge
10.00
Shipping Services
USPS
Accepted Payment Types
PayPal
Return Policy & Additional Details
If you aren't happy with it, let me know and within 14 days you can ship it back for a full refund.
Please send me a private message if interested in the item!
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-06-2013, 07:31 PM
|
| |
Maybe this was due to my own error. Seems as long as I avoid depressing the lens release button while mounting the lens to the body, the auto focus still works. Maybe if that button gets depressed while turning the lens, the screw heads don't line up?
On the plus side, I got a nice macro shot of the AF drive pin...
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-05-2013, 01:44 PM
|
| |
Shoot. The title of this thread is what happens when you start one sentence and finish another....
Should say "My K20D won't focus"
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-05-2013, 01:40 PM
|
| |
Hey everyone,
I need to ask a little advice of the crowd. I have a K20D that I haven't shot much with over the past 6 months. Last night when I put either of my auto-focus lenses on the camera, it wouldn't consistently focus. About every third time I remounted the lens to the camera, auto-focus would work. The rest of the time I would just hear "whirr-whirr, whirr-whirr" and it would look through the viewfinder as if lens was changing its focal distance by about an inch. It certainly sounded like the camera was making an attempt of it, but it couldn't change the focal distance. I've not had this problem before.
I'm attaching a couple pictures I took of the lens mount, specifically focusing on the AF drive pin. Does it look OK to you guys, or does something look out of whack? Any thoughts?
Thank you,
 |
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
11-11-2011, 10:49 PM
|
| |
Just for fun, I've shot a handful of Division 1 NCAA basketball games. I've found that I'm generally happiest with the shots taken at 1/250th. I've taken a lot at 1/180th, and they tend to look just fine on the camera's LCD, but when I look at them on the computer monitor I wish I had taken them at 1/250th. I'm guessing that the guys you are shooting won't be running around the court as fast as the guys I'm shooting, so 1/180th might be just fine for you. That's 2 full stops faster than the sample picture you provided.
Gyms tend to be somewhat dark, so you will likely need some F2.8 or faster lenses. I was never happy with the ISO 1600 shots I took with my K10D. The K20D, which I have now, is more capable in that department and it appears (though I've never used one) that the K-5 is even more capable still.
My 2 cents is that you will likely need an upgrade in both the camera body and lens department, and that I would start with the camera.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-05-2011, 02:04 PM
|
| |
I have had different results with manual metered lenses. Generally, I found that the more you stopped down the lens, the more the camera overexposed the scene. I posted a thread about this some time ago with example pictures. I'll link it below. Others that contributed to the thread seemed to have similar experience to mine. I'm surprised to read that you are seeing the opposite (e.g., underexposure the more you stop down).
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/34265-takumar-...w-f-stops.html |
|
Forum: Sold Items
09-17-2011, 10:21 AM
|
| |
i sense I'm late to the party, but you have a PM from me too.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
09-07-2011, 08:53 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
09-04-2011, 11:33 PM
|
| |
Phooey. In the message above, everywhere that I say F=6.5, I should have said F=6.7. My F-stops were F'd.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
09-04-2011, 11:27 PM
|
| |
I often see people say that they can adapt to the slower max sync speed of Pentax with neutral density filters. I shoot flash very frequently. I don't see how a neutral density filter helps this issue.
Lets say that at 1/250th and F=5.6 you could balance your flash and sunlight, but that at 1/180th you need to set your aperture to F=6.5 to get the sunlight correct, and at that aperture your flash doesn't have enough output to balance with the sunlight. Or maybe it's not a max output issue, maybe it is a battery recycle time issue. Either way, for our example F=5.6 will work for your flash but F=6.5 is too much to ask. Moving on. Putting a half-stop neutral density filter on your lens will allow you to shoot the sunlight portion correctly exposed at F=5.6 and 1/180th, but it doesn't help you with the portion of the picture that is exposed by flash. Consider that the neutral density filter is cutting all the light that reaches the sensor in half. It doesn't discriminate between sunlight and flash light. If the light ratio between what was sun exposed and what was flash exposed is off before you put the neutral density filter on, it will be off by the same amount after you put the neutral density filter on.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Compact Cameras
08-26-2011, 11:45 PM
|
| |
I have no experience with the W90, but the differences between those two pictures are really surprising to me. I have to think that there are differences in the default settings between the two cameras. It appears that the Fuji picture has a much higher level of sharpening applied. I played around with the W90 picture in Paint Shop Pro and was able to get to the sharpness to be very similar between the two. I was also able to adjust the white balance such that the yellow areas in the W90 picture appear more green, as they do in the Fuji picture. The other big difference is that the shadows on the cup appear to have a lot of purple in them. I couldn't do anything for that, as it appears that the W90 picture doesn't pick that up at all. Default settings could explain the sharpness and the yellow - green shift, but I can't imagine it would cause the W90 to miss the purples entirely.
Again, I wish I had some experience with the W90 to draw upon for you, but those differences are very surprising to me.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
08-15-2011, 07:20 PM
|
| |
PM sent regarding the ME bodies.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
07-29-2011, 06:24 PM
|
| |
It may be tricky to make the wiki a sticky. (deadpan face)
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
07-24-2011, 10:24 PM
|
| |
You've entered an area of photography that takes a lot of practice. Learning how to blend flash with ambient light effectively and transparently is not something you will get good at in a day or two. Rather, like exposure and composition, it is something you will continue to learn and build upon for as long as you shoot.
This is the best site I've come across for learning flash techniques. I've attended one of Neil's seminars too. He's great.
planet neil
Buy a system flash with tilt and swivel and as much output strength as you can afford. People spend a lot of money on lenses (myself included), but the differences between good glass and great glass are subtle, and we photographers are the only ones who notice it. The difference between a properly exposed image, and one that isn't is drastic. Many people will notice that.
The pop-up flash is decent in a pinch, but will struggle when you need a lot of output. You are trying to balance against sunlight reflecting off a lake. That is very bright, and your pop-up flash will be easily overcome by that.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
03-04-2011, 10:35 PM
|
| |
Enter: Exposing to the Left
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-20-2011, 10:28 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
11-20-2010, 09:27 PM
|
| |
I decided to send one more roll back to the same lab. If these prints come back blue as well, I will change to a different lab for future rolls. For now, I will assume their equipment was off the day my two rolls went through, and that it doesn't represent a persistent problem unless the next roll comes back with the same results.
I will update when I get the next roll back.
Thanks again to everyone.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
11-20-2010, 01:17 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
11-20-2010, 12:43 AM
|
| |
Thank you to everyone who has offered their thoughts. A couple folks have asked to see if the negatives look different between the Fuji film (the blue pictures) and the Kodak film (normal colors). These films were shot with the same camera and lens and sent to the same processing lab, though they were processed a couple weeks apart.
In both shots, the Fuji negative strip is on top. The first picture shows the two strips on the same desk calendar used in the pictures of the prints. This was lit by flash and I color balanced in lightroom off the desk calendar. The second picture shows them taped to my computer monitor which is displaying a plain white screen. For this shot I color balanced manually in the camera off an open area of the computer screen. The Fuji negatives do look more red than the Kodak negatives. I don't have enough experience with negatives to determine if the Fuji negatives are too red.
 |
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
11-18-2010, 09:20 PM
|
| |
Jolepp,
Thanks for the reply. That would be the best possible scenario, because that means the rest of the rolls should be fine. I won't be able to determine that until the next couple rolls come back.
|
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
11-18-2010, 05:22 PM
|
| |
Hello everyone,
I've shot Pentax digital SLRs for a couple years now, but haven't shot more than the occasional roll of film since high school (quite a few years). I picked up a film SLR off a forum member not long ago and tried shooting a few rolls of film. The first 4 rolls were very cheap Kodak 400 speed color negative film that you can buy at a drug store. The dynamic range was abysmal, but the colors were largely true. I then bought some Fuji ProH 400 from Adorama. This is higher grade film and I anxiously waited for my first two rolls to come back from a mail-order developer. When the film came back, the prints all had a very noticable blue color cast to them.
I didn't have the film a long time. It was certainly not expired, or even close to its expiration date. I didn't store it in a refridgerator or freezer, but I thought that was only necessary if you were going to store the film for quite a while. The film is daylight balanced, as I don't think Fuji makes this line in any other color balance anymore.
Anyway, here are a couple pictures. I shot them on my white desk calendar so you could see them against a background that is color neutral. The first is of fern leaves. Notice how blue-green the leaves look. The second is of a print hanging on my wall. The wall color should be off-white. That is sunlight coming in the sliding glass door that lights it. The third shot is a night photograph. It will be harder to notice a color cast in this kind of picture, but it looks awfully blue to me.
If anyone has experience with this film, or has an idea as to why I'm getting such blue looking pictures, please let me know. These are three pictures, but every one has the blue cast to it.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-24-2010, 07:42 PM
|
| |
Yeah, I guess something like that. :) Very nice pictures, by the way.
Now, if you can get a hold of a K-5 and a D7000 and compare the two in similar lighting, we would be on to something.
Whenever I see these test shots at 6400 or whatever, and the other settings lead me to believe the shot could have been taken at 400 or 800, I think "nice--entirely unrealistic, but nice."
|
