Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Showing results 1 to 25 of 88 Search:
Forum: Sold Items 05-15-2014, 04:51 PM  
For Sale - Sold: 300mm F4.5 F (White) with Tripod Foot.
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 23
Views: 2,413
Looks like drilling will be the winner.

Sweet lens. Very stable, yet not too heavy.

I bought this one from Asia a few years ago, and I'm not getting as much use out of it as I once did. Need to reduce some visa bills (:
Forum: Sold Items 05-15-2014, 06:50 AM  
For Sale - Sold: 300mm F4.5 F (White) with Tripod Foot.
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 23
Views: 2,413
Pentax Telephoto Lens: 300mm F4.5 with tripod foot.

- $950 (SOLD)
- $25 Shipping to US locations.

Flawless glass. Excellent body. Works perfectly.

This is a stellar lens that covers Full Frame. The white paint is less fragile than the silver paint of the later, FA series.

I have a few sales here, and also some at Range Finders Forum all with positive feedback.
Forum: Sold Items 06-17-2013, 07:34 PM  
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 645N, 75mm AF, 35mm and 55mm.
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 4
Views: 2,474
Reduced price by $200 for the full package. Also, I'll ship to Canada, if you cover the additional expenses.
Forum: Sold Items 05-19-2013, 12:48 PM  
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 645N, 75mm AF, 35mm and 55mm.
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 4
Views: 2,474
PentaxForums.com Marketplace Listing

Item for Sale
Pentax 645N, 75mm AF, 35mm and 55mm.

Asking Price for full package:
1,000 USD

Item Location
Colorado (United States)

Item Description
P645N plus 75mm f 2.8 FA and four backs: $580

The camera is in extremely good shape, except for a missing rubber nub on the shutter speed knob. Very fun to shoot. See the classic Ken Rockwell review: Pentax 645N

35mm Lens (22mm equivalent): Excellent condition; Great landscape and wide angle lens: $480.

55mm Lens (35mm equivalent): $120. Glass Excellent, body great.

I won't separate the 75mm from the camera, but if you buy the full system, I'll throw in AF500FTZ flash (small crack), off-shoe flash extension and extra strap (has special clips for P645N camera).

I'll take offers on those additional items.

Ship to CONUS, or Canada at additional cost . I've had a few sales here, and several others at Rangefinder Forum. I'd prefer to sell to someone with a track record here on the Pentax Forum.

Are you the original owner of the item being sold?
No

Are you selling or trading this item?
Selling

Item Condition (Key)
Used
Excellent

Shipping Destinations
Continental U.S. Only

Shipping Charge
$30

Shipping Services
USPS, FedEx, UPS

Accepted Payment Types
PayPal

Return Policy & Additional Details
I'll pack things up securely. Shipping less for smaller items if you buy them separately.

Please send me a private message if interested in the item!
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 09-13-2012, 07:14 AM  
help me decide between a 67 and a 645n
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 26
Views: 2,944
I've really enjoyed the P645N for operation and carrying (Lorenzo bought one of my bodies, and the other is up for sale at the moment). I would not want to carry a P67; I would look at a rangefinder in that format.

Also, consider the computer power necessary if you are digitizing the negatives. I can handle 645 scans reasonably well, but if I photomerge to 67 size my computer really bogs down. (That same problem keeps me from jumping to Nikon D800!)
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 09-10-2012, 03:51 PM  
Pentax announces official product updates!
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 227
Views: 23,345
Poor autofocus on my K5 hurt my usage under low-light situations, so for me improved AF on the new K5II is an important improvement. AF was driving me towards jumping brands.

16mpix is plenty for most of my needs, and it is more than plenty for screen & internet images! So, I'm not in the gotta-have-FF circle, despite my FF lenses. Plus, 16mpix on APS is the same as 32mpix on FF, so pixel resolution is already at the point where you need very high-quality glass (Zeiss or Leica?), and very demanding of photographic technique. One benefit, is that on APS we are using the sweet spot from the middle area of FF lenses. AND most important, FF sensor would add $1,000 to the price. $1,200 is a decent price point.

I'd probably prefer a 400mm f/4, but the 560mm telephoto would be useful for bird photography. That makes 800mm on APS sized sensors. I don't know how it stacks up for sports. A good reviewer will have to test the lens for those uses.
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-29-2012, 09:17 PM  
Diffraction limiting?
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 19
Views: 2,598
Yamanobori, Yes, there is a second calculator on the Cambridge Colour page.

By changing the inputs, it shows that the "airy disk" (a direct measure of diffraction) depends on aperture, but not at all on format size, which is what I said up above. The calculator is cool because (in the advanced mode) you can plug in camera parameters, like 35mm Full Frame with 36 mpixels. This gives you the pixel size, and then you can easily see whether the airy disk (diffraction circle ) is larger or smaller than the pixel size.

The Calculator also calculates Circle of Confusion which depends on format and pixel size, but not on aperture. It is related to depth of field, but CoC and DoF are perceptual rather than mathematical measures. Cambridge in Colour defines Diffraction Limit as the point where airy disk exceeds CoC as defined by their calculator.

Presenting the diameter of the CoC and the Airy disk in microns let's you understand how those two effects appear at a given camera's pixel size. By playing around with the calculator, you can see that a small sensor camera has greater depth of field than a medium format camera.

Another take-away is that CoC is defined a bit too coarsely for the latest FF small pixel cameras like the D800. With such high resolution, you should set Depth of Field narrower than the aperture markings on the lens based on the older definition of CoC (whatever, something like 20/20 vision at 20 inches from a 20 inch print?)

If Yamanobori and I have any differences, I think it is about definitions, not the math/science.

The Diffraction Limit is different from noticing that diffraction has started to reduce contrast on fine details in your image. I highly recommend getting a subscription to Diglloyd's "Making Sharp Images". Today's 36mpix FF cameras have such high resolution and small pixel sizes that they compete with Medium Format, but only if you have superlative lenses and superlative technique. It is possible that Nikon has accidentally produced a new camera that requires people to buy Zeiss or Leica quality lenses in order to fully utilize 36mpix.
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-29-2012, 05:29 PM  
Diffraction limiting?
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 19
Views: 2,598
The Luminous Landscape article mentioned by Westmill pointed to this Cambridge in Colour article, which has a graphic that lets you change aperture and pixel size, thereby viewing the how many pixels are affected by diffraction.

Just roll over the two factors, aperture or camera (pixel-size).
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-29-2012, 03:03 PM  
Diffraction limiting?
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 19
Views: 2,598
Incidently, diffraction is an optical effect that causes details in the lens image to smear across several pixels. This first shows up as a loss of contrast, rather than blurry pixels.
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-29-2012, 02:53 PM  
Diffraction limiting?
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 19
Views: 2,598
Your formula is f-stop vs line-pairs, which doesn't say anything about lens or film size. In other words, diffraction is not about lens size or camera format, only about aperture and pixel size.

You win big on a 6x7 camera because you have film that is more than 4.5x larger than 35mm! You scan it at 3000 dpi (56 mpixels equivalent) and print natively at 22x28 inches at 300 dpi. A 3000 dpi scan is about the same as 8.5 micron dots, which is like the Nikon D700, which has a 12 mpix, full frame sensor. Drop to a high-resolution crop-frame sensor, like the K5 and D800. These both have 4.8 micron pixels, and produce an 22x31 inch print at 150 dpi. No wonder diffraction doesn't show up in your 6x7 prints!

Digicams have very small pixels (under 2 microns); they show pixel-level loss of contrast due to diffraction by or above f/4. Pentax K5 and Nikon D800 both have 5.8 micron pixels, which may start to show diffraction by f/5.6.

The old rule of thumb for 35mm was f/8 and be there, which gave you a great, real-world balance between depth of field and diffraction. Pixel-peeping on today's small pixel cameras lets you see where you want to set your rule of thumb. Do a slideshow of a detailed image shot across all your apertures to see how depth of field and diffraction trade off with each other (Or subscribe to Diglloyd).

Pixel-level camera shake and mis-focus show up on these new, high-res cameras, also!
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-28-2012, 01:46 PM  
Diffraction limiting?
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 19
Views: 2,598
Diffraction at smaller apertures causes pixels to blur on small or large format cameras. A larger format camera comes off better mainly because you don't have to blow up up the image as far to get the same resolution. As pointed out, there are other reasons to use a larger format.
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-07-2012, 09:41 PM  
Post your medium format photos!
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 12,639
Views: 2,065,175
I appreciate the comments on my Canyonlands photo. I took this shot after stepping over the guard rail protecting us from that breath-taking drop-off. It was early pre-dawn so colors were distorted and rather dark to my natural eyes. Thanks for the comments about the colors, as this is the difficult part of this image. Velvia normally has a bit of a magenta cast, but in this case the scanning professional thought it had some extra magenta from the developing, something he tried to correct for.

As I said, I'm not completely satisfied with everything. I'm very excited that I have a nice, large, 16-bit, malleable file from the drum scan; the original, 8-bit scan gave me minimal ability to adjust things.

In this photo, I really like having the shadows deep, as I want the image to be about the highlights. I've considered taking them a little darker, leaving suggestions of texture in the plateau. That is what is so nice about having a quality scan.

I agree that there may still be too much magenta, although in the Canyonlands at dawn, the purple of the plateau is somewhere between reality and a color cast.
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-07-2012, 04:46 PM  
Post your medium format photos!
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 12,639
Views: 2,065,175
Rangefinder Forum had a discussion on NCPS "enhanced" scanning. I made the following posts, which may be of interest here.

The NCPS "enhanced" scan resolves grain on 135 velvia 100.

I've had quite nice scans from NCPS on Velvia when the exposure was on and the light was good. I've had poor scans when the light and exposure were challenging. In the latter case, I sent out for drum scans with an experienced, independent photographer ($30 for 645), who extracted great color and dynamic range. He also corrected some magenta cast, which he thought came from over-used developer. NCPS supplies 8-bit jpgs, which don't allow you much latitude for exposure, fill and recovery in ACR.

Here's an example where the drum scan was necessary, and the NCPS "enhanced" scan couldn't capture the dynamic range. From my "Landscape, Nature, Weather" gallery at PhotoKinesis.info (2-shot pano from Velvia 100 on Pentax 645N at 35mm; I'm not completely happy with my final image, but do me a favor and view it a good monitor!):

Forum: Pentax K-5 12-08-2011, 08:26 PM  
K-5 for sports-photography
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 1,739
Views: 298,482
I'm normally more of a street, landscape or travel photographer, but this November I learned quite a bit about sports photography with my K-5 at some colorful and dynamic festivals in Bhutan.

Lighting tended to be sufficient (sometimes harsh, sometimes nicely muted), but speed vs depth of field was still an important tradeoff. The biggest challenge came from busy backgrounds, therefore subject isolation was essential. This was mitigated by choice of shooting position, sitting close to the action and using wide angle (20mm), or by shallow depth of field using a medium telephoto (77mm at f/1.8).

In retrospect, I wish I had a professional, sports-optimized camera like Nikon or Canon with FF sensor to fully utilize my wide angles and maximize shallow depth of field. I occasionally benefited from the super-tele isolation provided by my f/4.5 300mm F, but I would have benefited most from a FF, fast-focusing camera, like a Nikon D3 or D3s with an f/1.4 24/35mm or the f/2.0 105/135mm DC. The FF sensor lets a wide angle be nice and wide, and provides shallower depth of field for the medium telephoto.

I did not use a zoom lens, which meant I had to do a lot of lens changes. Using the 50-135mm f/2.8 would have given me insufficient depth of field.

The first and third were taken with the f/1.8 31mm Limited; the second was taken with the f/2.8 20mm FA. You can see more Bhutan photgraphse at http://PhotoKinesis.INFO



Forum: Pentax K-5 12-08-2011, 08:04 PM  
What would make you upgrade to the next flagship APS-C?
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 101
Views: 7,603
I really like my K-5:

(1) Small form factor.
(2) Haptics/Usage, in particular knob/button placement and the green button, single hand operation.
(3) Wide dynamic range of the RAW files
(4) Good prime lenses

I don't care or want more pixels than 18M; I'd rather have improved low-light performance.

I feel insecure about the K-5's focusing ability with moving subjects, especially in low light.

I have great prime lenses, in particular the 31mm and 77mm limiteds. The former is a great performer, and the 77mm has wonderful, creamy bokeh. But, I wish I could use the 31mm and 77mm to their full capability on a FF sensor.

My ideal replacement would be a Full Frame 18M (maybe 24M) sensor with improved focus engine.
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 08-22-2011, 08:27 AM  
Buying complete K5 kit, need a lil advice...
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 42
Views: 3,603
Although it is super-light for school, the Macbook air doesn't quite have the oomph for photo & video. I find my macbook from a couple years ago too slow. I have heard that the new macbook pros are sufficient.
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 08-22-2011, 08:23 AM  
Buying complete K5 kit, need a lil advice...
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 42
Views: 3,603
One reason for Pentax is the availability of quality prime lenses. Yours is approximately the same set I use; 31/77 limited instead of 40/70. I have the 50-135mm, but rarely carry it since I bought the 77mm.

For wildlife and birds, the quality of a 300mm prime really shines. I traveled with 70-300mm on Nikon, but mostly used the ends, and found f/5.6 a little slow. For a couple of decades lens designers have been really good at tele-primes in terms of bokeh and detail. I love the images I get from pro-glass at 300mm, and I'm extremely happy with the F300mm f/4.5. Same size as the 50-135mm, and a bit lighter than the DA300mm f/4 which is surely a good option.
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 08-21-2011, 10:40 AM  
Like everyone else, I need help with my long lens purchase!
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 18
Views: 2,780
The classic, old-school prime set on FF is 35mm 50mm and 90mm. This is easy to match on APS size cameras. My basic lens set is 21mm, 31mm, 77mm (which is a 105mm equiv telephoto). Most people upgrading from kit lenses would choose the 16mm-50mm and 50-135mm f/2.8 zooms and be happy. (Your budget and shoulder would be happy, also)

The crop-factor means longer telephotos are easy to find, but usually excessive unless you have a specific need. I mean, the 50-135mm is like the FF 70-200mm journalist's friend. Can you give a specific reason why you want to go longer than 200mm equivalent? Birds, wildlife, sports, paparazzi? Other than that, you can almost always zoom with your feet with a 77mm or 135mm.

I have the 50-135mm, but once I bought the 77mm I found I didn't use the 50-135mm very much. I do like shooting birds and wildlife, but 135mm doesn't get me close enough for birds. So, for my defined needs, I researched 300s, and bought the wonderful 300mm F f/4.5, which is almost identical in size to the 50-135mm; pretty damn good for a pro-quality, FF glass.

300mm zoom or prime?

You have several 300mm options, but few choices above that. On Nikon I really liked the 70-300mm as a travel lens, but found that the f/5.6 at the long end struggled in low light. Also, I almost always used it at the ends, either 70 or 300. The solution is a no-brainer: for the same size, pick a pro-quality lens optimized at 300mm. I think you can't go wrong with F300 f/4.5, FA300 f/4.5 or DA300 f/4. They each cost about $1,200, and telephoto lens design is not nearly as compromised as zoom lens design.

I chose the F300 f/4.5 because I wanted the tripod foot, and I have residual hope that Pentax will come out with a FF. I always shoot at f/4.5 and I'm extremely happy with the bokeh of the backgrounds and the sharp, sharp details of the focus point.

What about 300mm f/2.8? The main issue is weight and convenience. If you need it, you need it, and you can't complain about the $3,200 price, because that is what you'd pay on the used marked for Nikon or Canon. Availability is the main issue.
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 08-16-2011, 10:43 PM  
Fast Tele Dilemma...
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 5
Views: 1,469
Think of the 50-135mm as a long, journalist zoom lens (75-200mm in 35mm terms). If you really want telephoto, you probably want to jump up to 200mm or 300mm (300 or 450 im 35mm), in which case a prime tele has much better quality than any of the zooms.

Surprisingly, even the FA/FA* 300mm f/4 and f/4.5's are smaller than the 50-135mm. I haven't held the newer, DA version.

In other words, if you need tele, get a tele prime; if you need zoom go for the f/2.8 50-135mm.

But, to tell you the truth, since I got a 77mm limited and an FA 300mm, my 50-135mm mostly stays at home. Only occasionally do I feel I need something between those two. I mostly use 21mm, 31mm, 77mm and 300mm. I rarely miss 50mm or 135mm, but on crop-sensor camera, I do miss having a wide angle like a 15mm, but maybe I'd take a 10-24mm zoom.
Forum: Pentax Film SLR Discussion 08-02-2011, 10:40 PM  
Getting into medium format film
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 21
Views: 4,076
This camera is more fun than just about any other camera, except maybe a little Leica. The SLR-like handling and non-modal knobs are great for anyone like me who can't deal with TV remotes. The weight is less than the big pro Nikon cameras.

I don't think lack of changeble backs is that much of an issue. Most people are all into Velvia or all into B&W. If you swing both ways, there are only 16 shots on a roll, or else you can pick up a second body for your other film. The lenses are expensive, not the bodies, and if you depend on it, it may be nice to have a back-up for an out-of-production camera.

Yes, the 35mm is a great lens... 21mm equivalent. I'm happy with the manual in that focal length, as I use it for landscape where I can play depth-of-field games. I'd be turning off the auto in most cases.

All that said...

I find that when I have North Coast develop and scan my Leica Velvia shots the total mpixels is about the same as their 645 scans. To get higher-res, grain-less medium format you might need to be at 6x7 and do your own scanning. And, in the end, I really love the grain in 35mm velvia I get from NCPS. See this blow up of a lilly-pad (Leica 50mm summicron, Velvia 100). Note that all the noise is luminance and none of it is color noise.

Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 07-23-2011, 07:18 PM  
overpriced lenses
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 70
Views: 8,069
Love the F* 300!

I've got dibs on your FA* 85mm!

Seriously, I strongly suggest that you don't sell. After FA* you will be disappointed in the DA zooms. IQ is fine, but the build and feel is no comparison with the FA*.

I recently priced out Nikon replacements for my Pentax lenses, which are mostly FAs or Limiteds. All the pro Nikon lenses are $300-$500 more than the Pentax. You can't quite match all the Full-Frame Nikon lenses without going to the used market, where trading is a lot thinner than for Nikon gear. In Super-tele, say 300mm f/2.8, a used Pentax is about the same price as the Nikon.

Pentax has a better line-up than Nikon in DA lenses, where Nikon relies on consumer zooms; to get pro-level primes you have to up-buy to FF.
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 06-26-2011, 10:10 PM  
So my Wife is going to Antartica!
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 34
Views: 5,310
My Nikon 70-300mm has been an extremely useful lens length for travel with my D90. A bit slow at the long end for birds in jungle, but the extra ISO stop on the D7000 sensor would ease that restriction a bit. There was a Potoo, sitting on a branch in Ecuador, and I couldn't extract a decent shop from the shadows...

On Pentax, the comparable lens would be the 50-250mm. Since Antarctica is well-lit (as opposed to jungle floor), this shouldn't be a problem. No need for a super-tele. It turns out that the wildlife in Antarctica is extraordinarily unafraid of people. Even the leopard seal nursing a baby (wow!) If you can get to 250mm, you get most of the good shots you need.
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 06-21-2011, 09:55 PM  
So my Wife is going to Antartica!
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 34
Views: 5,310
I've had the great fortune to take that "trip of a lifetime". Given the expense, an extra backup camera is minimal additional cost; sell it afterward if you have to. I did find my batteries ran down, but the real issue was having the right chargers to meet the ship electrical standards. Most important thing to take would be extra batteries, converters, chargers, and all kinds of random adaptors.

Other ideas:

A monopod is easier than a tripod when dealing with zodiacs and hikes.

Water resistance is useful, for unexpected sea water, and lots of spitting rain/snow/sleet/sideways wind.

The tele zoom will be used. I found that when the right moment ocurred, I did not have the 300mm I really needed.

Did I say extra batteries and extra body?
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 06-15-2011, 08:20 PM  
Going to Colorado in a week, want a second opinion on lenses to take
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 12
Views: 1,811
Nights can be very cool.

Daytimes may be hot, but humidity low, so you'll be a lot happier than you think.
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 06-14-2011, 02:26 PM  
Going to Colorado in a week, want a second opinion on lenses to take
Posted By MetaD
Replies: 12
Views: 1,811
From Estes, I'd suggest circling through the mountains instead of Colorado Springs. The Front Range is very populated; Colorado State Parks are less mobbed with people than National Parks, and you may have surprisingly nice experiences. So you could profitably skip Pikes Peak, unless you are going that way. Even if CSP, skip Pikes Peak and do Garden of the Gods, Castlewood Canyon State Park, Roxborough State Park, Eldorado Canyon (you're climbing, right?).

I'd highly suggest the Sand Dunes NP for photography rather than the Black Canyon of the Gunnison. Campsites are usually available if you reserve ahead or get there by 1:00 pm.

For sure bring the wide. Full rainbows require 18mm, I think. I'm living (somewhat happily) these days within a 135mm limitation, but you will certainly have opportunities to shoot deer, elk, sheep, chipmunks or birds, so you might bring the 80-400 in the car. If you shoot birds you know what you need.

Important: Graduated ND filter for sunsets, ND4 and tripod to blur waterfalls. In truth, I don't end up using the ND4 or a polarizer much, but when you need to cut reflections from wet leaves or wet rocks the polarizer is essential.

If you are on film, the high-altitude skies are very blue and an 81A helps warm things. Velvia is great, but has a lot of trouble with sunny, high-contrast days. Have some for cloudy or rainy!

Tripod for starry-skies away from city lights. Welcome to the West!
Search took 0.01 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 88

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:59 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top