|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-22-2009, 11:01 AM
|
| |
I don't understand why they dropped this lens. But it is not only Pentax. It looks like camera makers are afraid of bringing fast normals or moderate wa's for APS-C, as if they are coursed. Also Oly promised fast compact lenses. Where are they, many years after the introduction of 4/3???
It is still the situation that many photographers are longing for the simple things that were natural 15 years ago. Some call this progress :mad:
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-21-2009, 06:39 PM
|
| |
Jonson_PL, this I dare call an elaborate answer, many thanks. Seems you know what you're talking about, and the sample pictures are fantastic, albeit don't tell much about the FA* ;-) only one shows weird bokeh (to my eye). But really wonderful pictures.
If the backlight issue is true, then I should go with the Sigma, because I love backlight.
But what you say that the FA* shows good contrast wide open, so is suited for flat lighting conditions, is also mouth watering to me, because these are usually the conditions under which f2 is used.
Really hard decision...
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-21-2009, 06:26 PM
|
| |
Laurence Kim is a high dollar wedding tog who makes gear recommendations on his blog here. Despite that he doesn't know about Pentax or Oly, I find it indicative that only the highest budget set consists of brand 2.8 zooms for Canikon, whereas the next lower set (still $6500 - $7500) has the Tamron 2.8. People compare a lot, but you can't overlook that the Canikon zooms cost twice to three times as much as Pentax, let alone the FF offerings.
Same applies to the fast prime rec. Especially Nikon sucks in this regard. On APS-C you have nothing like the 31 1.8 Ltd., neither on FF. You can buy the 35 1.8 or the 35 2, neither of which can be compared to the 31 1.8 Ltd.
My recommendation is that you write down everything you need with prices and see what the sum is like. Then you will know.
Still I understand that people get insecure about the future of Pentax. This is another consideration to be taken into account when making a buying decision. Have no answer here.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-21-2009, 11:36 AM
|
| |
I hate to use flash for the most time. Only at the dancefloor I use off camera flash in my left hand, camera in right hand.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-20-2009, 09:31 AM
|
| |
The 16-50 is a very fine lens. I cannot comprehend the negative statements of some. It is a zoom lens, it is sharp AND has nice bokeh, which is quite unusual. It's rendering appeals to my eye very much, which is not possible to make objective. What is objective I guess is that the build quality is superb, and it handles really well.
I had the Tamron for a few days and returned it, because at the wide end it didn't focus correctly, and no AF adjustment could cure it. I am glad about it, because the Pentax is a different league (better). One big thing which is often overlooked is the manual focus override which is very handy if you want the camera to focus again. Sometimes I know that the focus is off, then I just turn the focus ring to throw the lens out of focus so that it refocusses again.
So, you get weather sealing, 1mm more wide, better build, manual focus override for a little more money. The Pentax is actually quite cheap compared to other lenses of this type.
Bottom line: I would go for the Pentax.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-20-2009, 09:16 AM
|
| |
I also don't like those doom'n'gloom postings, but honestly I myself am a little concerned about Pentax. Here in Vienna/Austria there is less and less Pentax. My favourte store told me that they are not sure if they will stock Pentax any more because there is no Pentax rep in Austria and no customer service. If something has to be sent in it goes to France now. It is a pity, because I like Pentax and have a lot of gear. I am not brand loyal, I just hope that the K-mount won't vanish. Indeed I would be satisfied with FF Samsung.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-20-2009, 09:03 AM
|
| |
jptreen, I absolutely respect your opinion, plus I find it very valuable. Because it sounds reality proven ;-) And it seems we are similarly minded what concerns lenses: I also want a shooters lens, not a brickwall miracle.
I would shoot film probably, but unfortunately I am not in that spheres financially. I don't know clients that would pay for the extra effort. And I won't do it just for myself, my love for the chemical darkroom is limited. I love the results, but, oh well.
If you folks don't give me good reason for the FA* soon, I am gonna try the Sigma.
PS: If I shot film, it would be either Olympus OM4 or Leica M, but rather Leica. For slrs there is nothing like OM. And why Leica? I am an RF guy somehow, also having an Epson R-D1 with Voigt 28/2 and I could imagine shooting a wedding with it. I want to sell a certain style, but am not there yet. I know Sean Reid shoots weddings with an M8 solely, and my approach is similar (which doesn't mean my photos are on Reid level, mind you). Maybe there is also no market here in Austria, but this is a different story. If someone is interested, a recent wedding that I shot is here.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-20-2009, 07:52 AM
|
| |
Thanks for the answers folks.
@Pentaxor: yes I have the 16-50 and i like this lens. But I need fast. I have the 31 Ltd. and the 35/2 - please don't ask ;-) The 31 Ltd. is my love, but I want wider and fast.
@wlachan: sorry, but I had a Canon 30D some time ago. No way, I hate the placement of the buttons, plus it feels cheap. Even more annoying there is the odd behaviour of the dials, i.e. they change functions depending if A or M mode. This cannot be changed by user and is an absolute no-go for me. The 5D MKII has a very loud shutter too. The K20D's is not the best in that regard, but way better than the Canon.
I am happy with Pentax (exept some AF issues, but I have seen same or even worse problems with high end Canon and Nikon. A side note on AF: I actually think that (some/many) Pros just don't care, from the little I have seen. But look in magazines and ads: even in high gloss there are often photos OOF if you look close).
Well what I really wanted to say is that I need to know if the FA* 24 is any good. So thanks again to wlachan here.
Do you know any online samples of these lenses' (FA* and Sigma) pictures, or more resources?
Thanks.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-20-2009, 07:42 AM
|
| |
I have the 31 Ltd. and love it. Your pics are just fine. The license plate may be very slightly OOF, but to my eye this is sharp "enough", considering it is 1.8, not to mention flat light. Mind you, sharpness and contrast are also related, we percieve low contrast as lack of sharpness and high contrast as sharp.
The flowers are hard to tell, because Pentax AF is really not predictable which such a subject. I mean the hughe AF sensor could find focus anywhere in this scene ;-)
Don't worry, enjoy your lens...
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-18-2009, 04:39 PM
|
| |
For me it comes down to lenses. There is no subsitute for the Canon 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 in Pentax land, this is my biggest complain, and I don't understand why Pentax isn't making an equivalent lens for APS-C.
As for the bodies, I don't think that the 5D (II) is so much better than the K20D.
My lenses for weddings are the 16-50 which can't be rated high enough and the 31 Ltd. which is a top lens not only within the Pentax stable. I would call this an M-Leica lens, rendering- and handling-wise, a little jewel.
I have thought about buying a Canon 5D with 35 1.4 for weddings, but I remembered that I hate Canon bodies when I tried one out. So I am also considering a FA* 24/2 or Sigma 24 1.8 for my K20D as I have written here.
For the bodies I would also recommend the K20D, especially if you are on a budget. You can buy two K20Ds and be happy. My only complaint with the K20D is focus consitency as it was with the K10D. There is no FF/BF but the focus sensor is too big. No way to work around here, sometimes the focus is just off by a big margin. And I doubt that this has changed with the K-7. Correct me if I am wrong.
The rest I would invest in glass. The glass makes the difference. But Pentax should not look away and finally bring a fast wide angle! In the meantime you can go Sigma here. I cannot see why you can't shoot a wedding with ISO 1600 and 1.8. Sean Read used to shoot weddings with an Epson R-D1 (same sensor as Nikon D50) and some nice M glass. And his high profile clients didn't complain.
On final word towards shooting dancing. Focus manually at 1,5 or 2 metres, f4-5,6 @ 16-20mm and off camera flash. Learn to keep the distance. The shots will show consistency in framing and compostion and look great. More dof here is an advantage of APS-C.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-18-2009, 03:40 PM
|
| |
I hope this is not a redundant post, but I really searched the forum and couldn't find anything useful.
So here is my question: Does anyone have experience with either lens or better both? I need a fast wideangle on the K20D for weddings. I already considered buying a C***n 5D with a 35 1.4 for exactly this purpose, but I can't handle this piece of mindless non-design :fedup:
Now I need something that comes close and unfortunately there are not many options in Pentax land. For my purpose I need good center sharpness wide open, corners are not important, and the most important thing is bokeh, really, if bokeh is not good than it is not for me. My landmark here is the FA 31 ltd. which I love for its rendering and bokeh.
Put differently: Is the FA* 24 any good? Because I could live with the Sigma, but I don't know if the rather pricey FA* is worth the extra bucks.
Any help appreciated in putting my mind to rest and give me a deciding point.
Thanks.
PS: Why oh why is there no new DA Ltd. 24/1.4? I just don't get it, since Pentax is commited to primes, and this would be the perfect wedding/reportage combo with the new K-7. I know there is the 21 Ltd., but 3.2 just doesn't cut it for (certain) professional purposes.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-04-2009, 04:53 PM
|
| |
This is absolutely great, congratulations so far!
I am not a hardcore programmer, but I would like to understand what have been done so far? Maybe you could give some resumee of the steps already done. Maybe from this starting point I could do something helpful, some isolated defined task.
I think I understand some basics, but I don't get the thing as a whole.
For example what can be done with this dll?
What does it mean that you have decrypted the firmware? You don't get source code from it, do you?
How could it look like when you change the firmware - codewise? Do you get to some point where you have the whole firmware as sourcecode and then change it, compile it and finally encrypt it? Or do you just bent some interrupts with a hex-editor?
It would be great if you provide some visible, tangible stuff, so that the average programmer can follow.
And good luck, I will follow this project for sure!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-02-2009, 01:54 PM
|
| |
Class_A, thanks for the reply. What would have interested me is wheter or not the alleged WB-sensor for focussing really works.
And, I tried everything with AF compensation with the 50 1.4, but the problem is inconsistency that cannot be corrected with one setting. Sometimes it is front, sometimes is back under tungsten.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-22-2009, 01:08 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-22-2009, 12:51 PM
|
| |
Hi Folks,
seems here are some K-7 users, so I have a question regarding focus:
I am quite happy with my K20D, except some focus issues. Sometimes, i.e. too often, the camera confirms focus but it is completley off. This is no bf/ff issue, just inconsitency of AF. The main problem seems to be that the AF Sensor (I only use center) is too big, so the camera finds contrast somewhere it is not supposed to. That the problem is more virulent the shorter the focal length seems to back this finding.
The other thing which confirms my thoughts is a comparison to Canon 50D which I got loaned from a friend along with 35 1.4 L lens. I compared to K20D with 31 Ltd. To my delight, this combo is not much better, only a little snappier and faster finding focus. But if the target is surrounded by other objects, i.e. the area I want to focus is thight, than the Canon is much more consistent albeit not perfect. And I know that on Olympus E3 you can choose between wide and narrow AF fields. So this is an issue which drives me nuts sometimes.
The other thing is tungsten light: the K20D has a problem with tungsten. I don't want to argue here, if you don't believe this, then fine. But I would appreciate info on wheter the K-7 solves this problem, from someone who has made the same observations. Because for this reason I can't use FA 50 1.4 in the studio with model lights. Luckily I don't have too many studio jobs. I also wonder how benjikan deals with this issue.
So, is the K-7 better AF wise? I am not interested in speed, but in accuracy and first and foremost in consitency and tungsten behaviour. I have most problems with 16-50, especially at about 20mm, but also with 31 Ltd. Otherwise I love these lenses so I would upgrade to K-7 just for consistent focus. Because, believe me, the K20D with 31 Ltd. gives more resolution than the Canon combo, with the same lovely bokeh, plus the K20D is much better regarding operation. Canon is just ignorant here. But that's another story ;-)
Thanks!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
07-18-2009, 07:16 AM
|
| |
mid-lower? This lens is first rate optically, which everyone knows who have used it.
But otherwise I agree: it can be done, just some rubber, but Canikon are too arrogant to make such lenses. Cudos to Oly and of course Pentax for offering top gear at reasonable prices.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
06-16-2009, 05:14 PM
|
| |
To to op: I very admire how consequently you approach street photography and whish I would be half as consequent.
Concerning IQ of the Oly I can assure you that it will be "good enough". There is actually no difference in real world pictures between APS-C and 4/3, all that brabbling is sensor size myth. I am mostly a reader on this forum, but I get the impression that it is getting worse and worse in terms of brand worship. The comments above about the "bad" quality of 4/3 are plain nonsense and uninformed.
Btw. even if the IQ would be worse it should be no problem for your kind of work. Gary Winogrand didn't shoot Leicas for IQ (he would have used a larger format then), but for size and shooting style. So forget this tripod using pixel peeping gearheads and their reiterations of too old fairy tales.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-14-2009, 07:23 AM
|
| |
:lol::lol: Fabulous, this makes me even happier with my decision for Pentax!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
04-21-2009, 12:45 PM
|
| |
I find the idea of open source firmware brilliant. At the moment our economic system is based on hiding things, preventing open development and real progress. If there is progress, this is a side effect, not intrinsic. 99% of people are doing jobs that are mostly senseless and which they don't like anyway.
Well, this gets a bit fundamental, but relates to open source firmware. Because people do best what they like. Current economy - which is hardcore capitalistic and reactionary, i.e. wants to utterly control people, even if they talk about personal freedom and stuff - is not really efficient. Just look at how well Linux and its various distributuns thrive. This is done by people for the sake of personal interest, not forced by econmic pressures. And back to cameras: look at the Canon firmware hacks, I think they drive some people into the cheaper Canon models, because they can unleash raw power afterwards. It is a pity that hacks are needed. The same was true for the Pentax K10D firmware hack. Why prohibit things that people really want? People want to correct lenses for focus inaccuracies, yet they deactivated this possibility with the next firmware update. This is not customer support.
Just release the source and let commited people do their work, which is proven multiple times. Pentax would be THE company to do this.
Imagine different jpeg engines, film modes, filters, this cameras could be customized to death. What a unique selling point for Pentax cameras?!
Maybe someone with a good connection to Pentax could seriously propose this. I mean, really, cameras are computers nowadays, but we basically throw them away after short time instead of customizing to our needs and updating with current technology. I don't think that this would cut sales, otherwise computers would sell very poorly. I think it would be the same with computers: the average user could run Ubuntu on an 5 year old macbook and do everything needed at a bargain, but still (s)he wants the newest stuff anyway. Same for cameras. So no danger from OS firmware.
|
|
Forum: Product Suggestions and Feedback
12-20-2008, 04:11 AM
|
| |
Pentax, where are you going? Do you really want to compete agains Sony or Canon with shiny stylish gems like the white K2000? I think this is futile.
We need things in the tradition of a photography dedicated company.
1. Better AF, finally!
2. A focus screen like Ratseye (like the idea). There is no sense in legacy support without a focus screen.
3. Tilt/Shift lenses, please, at least one for architectural work.
4. We have primes, yes, but no fast wideangle. Basically it is the same dilemma as Oly users face, nice camera, but no fast wide? We need a 24/2, soon!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-14-2008, 09:10 AM
|
| |
I couldn't have described it any better!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-12-2008, 08:21 AM
|
| |
Albert, I agree about Ken Rockwell mostly talking nonsense. But the comparison with homeless is utterly insulting (no pun intended) and arrogant. This would mean that poverty is proof for intellectual inability. It isn't, quite the opposite can be true. Rich and successful people are often socially and morally underdeveloped, which is IMO some sort of precondition to succeed in this world (look at the financial crisis).
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-13-2008, 04:26 PM
|
| |
I didn't ever hear of Edsel. Every day you learn something new. According to wikipedia, the Edsel was a hyped long announced new design, yet disappointing not meeting then very high expectations. I think it was a fine and beautiful car, but people expected a miracle after endless announcements.
First: this reminds me more of the Olympus E-1 (being a fine and unique design that didn't succeed) than a Pentax, or the E-3 (long announced and disappoiting not being a flying saucer). And not that said cameras are bad: I liked the E-1 a lot, and I still see some magig in its rendering of color and tones. Morons can't appreciate such things, like your "instructor" has no idea of real image quality I bet.
Second: the "instructor" has only proven to be an idiot. Many (not all, sic!) are.
|
|
Forum: Product Suggestions and Feedback
10-03-2008, 05:31 PM
|
| |
Since I posted above I am ever more taken with the idea to use the (to me) useless RAW-JPEG button for AF.
Is there someone around who would support this request? Having also a voice with weight at Pentax?
Think about it, better take the camera and try to imagine how it would operate. I think it would be great, at the same moment solving the problem of the vertical grip missing AF button.
Please support the idea, I need this firmware update! ;-)))
thanks
Andreas
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-03-2008, 05:26 PM
|
| |
Also agree, mate.
That Pentax had a "normal" for APS-C (31 1.8 ltd.) and the dedication to give a complete line of APS-C lenses was one reason for me to join the camp. I am glad that they continue with the 15 ltd. and so on.
My only concern is, that now they are mainly heading for the entry level market, which could mean not good news for special purpose lenses.
However, hopefully I am too pessimistic ;-)
|
