Search results for 'sensor cleaning' - page 96
16-50 problem ?
I think what Tyr's saying is that he had the same problem as me, ie when something looked to be pin-sharp in the viewfinder it was out of focus on the sensor. I too used the firmware hack (in conjunction with the calibration chart) and find it's made a world of difference - what I see in the viewfi...
Posted by hefty1 on 17/03/2008 - 14:54
16-50 problem ?
The hack won't alter the viewfinder in any way, just bring the sensor into line with it. How does it do that?
Posted by iceblinker on 17/03/2008 - 15:18
16-50 problem ?
When you do the adjustment, the figure you alter is in tens of microns. I took this to be moving the sensor forwards or backwards by this tiny, but obviously significant, amount. Right or wrong, my AF and MF has been much better since, especially with the wider aperture lenses I have (50 1.4, 30...
Posted by Daniel Bridge on 17/03/2008 - 15:26
16-50 problem ?
When you do the adjustment, the figure you alter is in tens of microns. I took this to be moving the sensor forwards or backwards by this tiny, but obviously significant, amount. Thanks for that Dan! I knew I was moving the sensor back-and-forth by incredibly small amounts but I couldn't figure ou...
Posted by hefty1 on 17/03/2008 - 16:55
16-50 problem ?
Thanks for that Dan! I knew I was moving the sensor back-and-forth by incredibly small amounts but I couldn't figure out what the units were - now I know. :D That's okay, although I said that, and can't remember where I knew it from. Does it say it on the adjustment screen? Anyway, when I said ...
Posted by Daniel Bridge on 17/03/2008 - 17:52
16-50 problem ?
Hello. I have just ordered the 16-50 2,8 lens. I didn't know about QC issues and FF/BF. I am really concerned about firmware fix because I've noticed that this problems occur widespreadely. So before i put my hands over my new lens I'm afraid I will have those issues too and I'm posting some quest...
Posted by taiabati on 19/03/2008 - 15:27
16-50 problem ?
Thank You hefty1! After some testing it seems that I have Back Focud issues. I will try the trick and let you know. One thing still discourages me: is the problem a lens/camera combination issue or is the sensor "out of focus"? I mean, if i adjust the focus to have a sharp DA* 16-50, ...
Posted by taiabati on 28/03/2008 - 10:51
16-50 problem ?
I can only speak from my own experience and I found that my K10D was back focussing with ALL my lenses, now it has been adjusted all my lenses focus perfectly. The problem will always appear more pronounced with fast lenses as they have a much narrower depth-of-field, this doesn't mean that your sl...
Posted by hefty1 on 28/03/2008 - 11:15
Lenses for photographing storms
from ziplock bags, to cutting the sleeve off a raincoat and using it over your camera with rubber bands, to buying an underwater housing, photographers have been making do for years. the ease and convienence of the new sealed lenses certianly is appealing, but I suspect that any time saved when pul...
Posted by Don on 21/03/2008 - 14:07
Sorry (no sticky) - FA or F on K series
Only the DA series lenses, which have no aperture rings and only cover the reduced size sensor, will be exclusive to the digital SLRs. All the other lenses will work on older cameras. An exception is the FA-J series which, although full frame, do not have aperture rings. This makes them of limited u...
Posted by johnriley on 24/03/2008 - 15:42
Sorry (no sticky) - FA or F on K series
Only the DA series lenses, which have no aperture rings and only cover the reduced size sensor, will be exclusive to the digital SLRs. All the other lenses will work on older cameras. An exception is the FA-J series which, although full frame, do not have aperture rings. This makes them of limited u...
Posted by dev_tt on 29/03/2008 - 00:11
Sorry (no sticky) - FA or F on K series
A quick run-through of the types: SMC Pentax (often known as K series), the first K mount lenses made 1975-77 Pentax-M, second generation K mount lenses introduced with the ME and MX Pentax-A, the first series with Auto aperture contacts, introduced with the Super A. Pentax-F, the first to us...
Posted by Dangermouse on 25/03/2010 - 09:06
MK 11 18-55 kit lens
The Mk II is marked as such and is supplied with the new K20D. It will make a difference with the 14.6 MP sensor and also with large prints. With your K10D the original 18-55mm is a very good lens anyway.
Posted by johnriley on 30/03/2008 - 20:24
MK 11 18-55 kit lens
The Mk II is marked as such and is supplied with the new K20D. It will make a difference with the 14.6 MP sensor and also with large prints. With your K10D the original 18-55mm is a very good lens anyway. With your K10D the original 18-55mm is a very good lens anyway.[/quote Cant agree more I lo...
Posted by philstaff on 03/05/2008 - 19:58
50-135 2.8 SDM
SDM lenses are focusing faster than non SDM lenses. For tracking a subject moving across the frame is no big deal, even for non SDM lenses. The problems arise when your subject is moving away/toward the camera. When you depress the shutter,even on AF-C, the camera will freeze the focus because th...
Posted by pentaxian450 on 07/04/2008 - 18:28
SDM Tele converters..
oops, looks like the MZ-5n does have PZ contacts after all, my bad! I was assuming that all the MZ series bar the MZ-S lacked these contacts. My guess is the lens identifies itself to the camera and the camera goes "Aha, a DA* lens. I will use SDM" but then for some reason the pass thro...
Posted by Mongoose on 11/04/2008 - 14:42
SDM Tele converters..
oops, looks like the MZ-5n does have PZ contacts after all, my bad! I was assuming that all the MZ series bar the MZ-S lacked these contacts.? It almost suggest that this type of lens has been planned for some time! My guess is the lens identifies itself to the camera and the camera goes "Ah...
Posted by beakynet on 11/04/2008 - 16:00
DA* 300 (or others) Advice Needed
I have found that 300mm is a very practical long focal length on an APS-C sensor. 400mm and more tend to create difficulties, like needing a tripod except in very good light (I don't like to compromise by using high ISO settings). Not only do you need a higher shutter speed on a 400, but you usu...
Posted by George Lazarette on 13/04/2008 - 13:37
purple fringes ... is it the lens or the CCD? confused!
Wikepedia has a sensible article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration CA is clearly a lens issue PF seems to be a combination of sensor and lens design issues Sea also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_fringing
Posted by amilner on 18/04/2008 - 10:36
SIGMA 10/20 ON PENTAX
Just to clarify: Depth of Field is the area with an acceptable degree of sharpness in an image. Depth of focus is the amount of leeway we have in the positioning of the film plane or sensor position.
Posted by johnriley on 28/04/2008 - 22:32
