Anvh

Joined: 4th July 2008

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

Anvh
Yeah I might indeed be tempting fate that's why I said I'm sure I get some horrid faces

I once had dropped the camera in the mud.. well not drop but I lost my balance and it was covered in mud after that... the only quick fix was to resine it so did that carefully hoping that the seals would last and they did. I know one Nikon user staring in amazement when i put the camera under the tap

After that I got more confident in the sealing and I've no problems now putting it under the tap.
Already done it a couple of times and the very very diluted detergent is great to get the grease/fat from your hands of your camera and get it really clean, also work great on the front element of your lens. Since the water is running and I don't put it underwater there is no pressure on the seals.

It surely is not for the faint hearted or the unlucky ones and without any risks

Comment by Anvh posted on Cleaning of kit at 09/04/2010 - 15:08

Anvh
I would also go the extra mile for the DFA 100mm WR, it's better build and the manual focus is great.

The lack of limiter isn't a problem with the pentax because you've the quick-shift. IF you see the focus over shoot, you simply stop and place the focus close to the subject and the AF will mostly snap on instantly then.
For macro work you wouldn't use AF so no problems at all there.

As for image quality basically all macro lenses are superb, you can't go wrong with that. But it's how they handle that make a Macro lens better than another.

Comment by Anvh posted on Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 vs Pentax 100mm DFA F2.8? at 09/04/2010 - 14:58

Anvh
Gwyn wrote:
And in Dutch I hear a lot of people use the English lens rather than objectief.
Yes you hear the word lens more but when you look at an internet shop they almost all call it objectieven and not lenzen but I've never found an English shop that calls them objectives and i know from myself that I use the word quite often as well depending on how scientific I want to sound.

Cuchulainn wrote:
As for the reference to rifle sights, the rear assembly being known as an ocular assembly isn't just to do with the presence of the eye - it also tells you that the outgoing beam (the one travelling towards your eye) will be about 5mm in diameter (since that's about the size of a dilated pupil).
I think you've nailed it

Comment by Anvh posted on Objective? at 09/04/2010 - 14:49

Anvh
Your GX20 has sealing... I simply resined my K10D with the DA*50-135 attach under the tap ^^;

Used one very tiny drop of washing soap for your dishes and that worked well, don't know if that's the recommend way... I already see the horrid faces before me
For the non WR lenses I use a microfiber cloth and the same dish water and make sure the cloth is only mildly moist.
But like I said probably not the way to clean them ^^;

Comment by Anvh posted on Cleaning of kit at 09/04/2010 - 14:40

Anvh
Was the SR ready? If you press to soon while it's getting set to be ready that might cause movement.

Comment by Anvh posted on K-x problem at 1/125th at 09/04/2010 - 00:18

Anvh
Thank you Hefty I'm going to use the word objective from now on, it sounds far more interesting than lens.

Comment by Anvh posted on Objective? at 08/04/2010 - 23:52

Anvh
Yes Father Ted but since the word objective comes from his ability to "picture" an object, shouldn't we call it a subjective if it pictures a subject rather than an objective?

Comment by Anvh posted on Objective? at 08/04/2010 - 22:54

Anvh
Father Ted, objective comes from the ability to "picture" an object there is no front or back involved.

However if we talk about models we talk about subjects so can't we call the objective a subjective then?

Comment by Anvh posted on Objective? at 08/04/2010 - 22:36

Anvh
Hefty a thought occur to me, camera lenses are designed to be objectives so how can they not be an objective if they aren't in use or is it really that strict?

I've no idea Father Ted

Comment by Anvh posted on Objective? at 08/04/2010 - 22:33

Anvh
whelmed wrote:
The seller got back to me and said "Blades are there and aperture is at minimum, after the aperture is opened up by moving the lever, the aperture is stuck at wide-open." So, to me that would imply damaged blades. Now that is a bit of a downer.
Doesn't have to be if they move freely, it's a simply spring that retracts the blades to their resting position.

Comment by Anvh posted on What 'could be' a Pentax lens at 08/04/2010 - 22:26

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo