Thank you for the photos, the lens looks very sharp.

Reuben that photo is lovely and the bokeh looks very good, wonderfull photo.

It's also not wide open.
With wide open shots you do get PF but stopped down it seems that problem is solved.

This one is at f/2.8 but every lens will have a problem with that wide open so much link
This one is at f/4 link
If it suffered a lot from PF you would have seen it in the highlights in the water but no such thing.

Yep those 3 and simply try them all out at the shop and pick the one you like the most in your hands, they are all good.

What settings did you use Jeanette and did you crop the photos?

The first one looks very good, will do some PP on that to pull all the detials out, you might be amazed what is in there.

The same with the second one, it looks very good.

Third one is a bit over exposed I think, the focus might be just oof or you moed a bit. DOn't know that yet but it doesn't looks so good at the first 2

Fourth one also just overexposed I think.

As you can see the bokeh (background) is pretty smooth and buttery.
Try it out for portrait wide open so f/4, it would preform very well.

You might be right but it surly delivers delivers the needed power.

There is also a normall contact that reads out the lens information and in that is the info what the lens can do.
You've 3 different option and reactions.

1 - No info about AF readed/recieved by camera from the lens - Camera thinks it's on old lens without focus system so doesn't try to focus at all.

2 - camera gets info it's an normall AF lens - Camera use the screw drive to focus

3 - camera gets info it's an SDM lens - camera use the two golden contacts (old PZ contacs) to power and move the focus.

(it's a bit more complex then this but it's the general idea)

The camera will always meter the focus and you'll get focus conformation with all of them since the focus metering is done in camera with all lenses.

Here are the contacts of the K-F mount link
The K-AF mount has one extra contact for digital information link

Here is also from the K-A mount... don't know how usefull that is and if it is used by the K-AF2 crippled mount link

Like I said above the DSLR connects to the PC with USB so a special cord instead of a Male USB a Female USB at the end should do the trick.
Then of course you need to have an USB interface software on the DSLR but that doesn't seem like a big deal.

External USB drives also works with the USB interface to my knowledge and those are cheap and easy, they are also bigger so you won't loose them so easily.

This is the cable but instead of Male-USB connector a Female-USB so that you can plug in a USB device in that.

I didn't say that Peter.
I was talking about connecting a USB device to the DSLR not a SD-card to a USB stick
Like Danny said

So you use the DSLR as the interface that transports the photos/video from the SD-card to the USB device.

You connect the DSLR to your computer by USB so the Connection is there but not yet the interface to let everything work.

The Sandisk Extreme III 8GB is £43.99 so £5,50 per 1GB
Dane-Elec So Mobile 500GB is £72.99 so £0.15 per 1GB
So that's why for long storage an USB device is much better then a SD card.

I went over the usual news page and I saw this.


Alright that is a new USB stick by Buffalo and it's 16GB!
So I thought, it would be great if you could connect a usb storage device to the camera and that the camera could transport the photos on the SD-card to the USB device.

Not very handy while shooting of course but with vacations you're a week or more from home and such simple feature should be perfect to copy the photos you made and store them on a cheap USB-stick or external hard-drive instead of using multiple SD-cards or using a laptop.

I think this is very feasible for a DSLR to do these days, they are already half a computer.
Do someone know if this is already be done... maybe I should pantent the idea

These shot came together after 3 days in the studio playing with water so it takes some time preparing them. Got 300 shots of glass with water to prove that
If you try to recreate them, really take your time preparing the shot probable and keep on playing till you get it right.
IF you get it right write it down in a book so that you know what you did... i didn't do that so probable spend on hours trying again to remember what i did

Thank you for your comments.

I did those shot quite a while ago so don't know exactly.

There isn't an awefull lot of pp in them, only played a bit with colours and such but with the whole photo.
I did delete the stream that resulted by me pouring water over the glass.

#2 is done by placing the glass upside down on a plate of glass and behind it a white plexiglass sheet with the flash behind it.
The flash removes the shadows that falls on the sheet and you get the white spot in the background.

That everything turn out so blue is by playing with the white balance, it's a trick used for ages. Using a blue filter to make the shot cooler.

I'm not happy that you don't see the top of the glass in the shot so need to think something about that.
I had it placed on a glass plate upside down but you saw the glass plate and couldn't get that out of the shot
Anyone have an idea?

Agreed and many don't see the DA*50-135 as a general purpose lens, it's not wide enough on the long end. A 17-70 would be a far better range for that.

It really depends on your need if the DA*50-135 is good enough. I hardly shoot landscapes so it's good enough for my shooting style but it isn't for everyone.

The kitlens is also a stunning lens and perfect for landscapes were you stop it down to f/8 and use it on the wide end. Most other lenses wouldn't be better then the kit lens at that range... so once again it depends on your shooting style if a upgrade is worth it.