Don't we always say that the photographer is more important then the equipment?

Amoringello that looks good but you lost the colours in the water but you gave me the idea, thank you very much!
Now need to find some time to go over it by hand
It's so nice to only use 1/4th of the sensor isn't it. I quite like the effect it looks like a painting.

When you actually see the problems with someone else his grass you do realize yours is pretty green afterall.

A couple of weeks ago we needed a slaveflash at the photoclub so it was ammusing to see that only my Pentax flash could do that and not their Canon speedlights. They even need special accessoires so that they can use their speedlights of the hot-shoe, no build in wireless you see.
Canon looks good with the big numbers but when you see the features...

There are also other things, ever system has their weak and strong points but Pentax offers the most strong points for me.
Also some things that look bad really aren't, I will do an AF test just to see which one is faster, the K10D + DA40mm VS Canon 40D + 70-200 f/4 L, David vs Goliath

I know that pentaxian450 but you use a K20D, the K10D hasn't got a 1 in it for nothing just kidding, we're talking about something else then the speed i'm afraid

Btw the AF is just as fast as on the FA50 I heared a couple of times or damn close to it.

Here is a part of the photo with 1:1 pixel size.
[IMG]http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk244/Anvh/CA.jpg[/IMG]

You see that there are colours in the water on the right close to the same colour as the CA, this only a part there is more on the left and right what you don't see.


Amoringello, I did try what you say the first time and tried it ust again... it seems I did something wrong the first time because the result is better now.

Great to hear that.
How is the autofocus?

Also the Pentax en Tokina 16-50 and 50-135 has the same optical arrangement and glass but there are some diffrences, such as coating and the mechanical part.

Adrian, shooting with a prime is really different then shooting with a zoom. With a zoom you can composit a shot and zoom to frame it, with prime you need to think about the limitations of the lens so you need to be flexable not the lens, it really is a diffrend way of thinking and shooting.

Something like a prime like zoom lens doesn't excist, although some come close.

Since you're talking about landscapes a lot and about the 17-70 I figure you want to use the lens for that, that's far easier to talk about then compare it to a prime lens.
The lens is surely sharp and for it's length it's a perfect walk around lens. For landscapes f/4 or f/2.8 doesn't matter since you're probable at f/8 or higher to get more dof and the lens is sharper around that range but for a general walk around lens f/2.8 is better.
17mm might still be not wide enough for landscapes, for some it is enough but the 10-20 or 12-24 are considered more usable for landscapes.

You already have your kit lens simply use that for awhile and see if you want a wider lens (10-20 or 12-24) or a longer lens (17-70), you aren't looking for a prime so far as I can tell.

good luck, hopefully I said something usefull,
Stefan.

I have a differend logic since I use Manual a lot. In M mode you have the aperture on the rear and shutter speed at the front, I keep that the same with Av and Tv. Then I've Ev compesation on the other dial since iso is still accesable when you press the ok button just like in M mode.

Glad to see that everyone has their own way of working

Nah, that will take the joy away.