All Forum Comments
No problems here, we go shares on the bills, put into a holiday fund and what's left is ours to do as we please. She buys vodka I buy kit and we don't tell each other off about our purchase choices. I also have a vw campervan which is more bottomless than camera kit :'(
Comment by cabstar posted on Poll : How many members tell their partner everytime they buy a new piece of kit? at 19/03/2013 - 15:27
Daniel Bridge wrote:
Dan
The 16-85 won't be constant 2.8 though more likely 2.8-4..MarkTaylor wrote:
Thanks for posting, though you're right about the price as I'd be inclined to stretch the extra mile and get a brand new lens if that's the best I could get 2nd hand.
SRS have a secondhand one too, but that's £599, while they've currently got them new at £695, and I go for a new one too at that price (if I were in the market for one). Personally, I'm interested to see whether the rumoured 16-85 appears any time soon...Thanks for posting, though you're right about the price as I'd be inclined to stretch the extra mile and get a brand new lens if that's the best I could get 2nd hand.
Dan
Comment by cabstar posted on Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 vs. Pentax DA* 16-50 f/2.8 at 19/03/2013 - 12:50
K10D wrote:
An interesting set Gary, were these hand held?
Best regards
Yes, I wander around the club taking photos of the clubbers for the clubs website, facebook and tv screens within the club.An interesting set Gary, were these hand held?
Best regards
Comment by cabstar posted on Some club photography and the poorly reviewed DA* 16-50mm k-5 mkii at 18/03/2013 - 23:20
Thanks for the info david, i will look out for one to try
Comment by cabstar posted on Portrait lens at 18/03/2013 - 21:11
davidstorm wrote:
I would echo what Robbiec has said above about the K55 F1.8. What a lens this is - super sharp and wonderful rendering of colour and bokeh. I would also consider something like a SMC Takumar 135mm F3.5 if you want one at the longer end. I did a shoot last year and this was the lens I used the most - it rendered the models in a very flattering way (example posted below, shot wide open at F3.5). This lens cost me £22 so it is an excellent 'starter' and one to hone your manual focussing skills on. BTW, with this lens you'll need an M42 to K mount adaptor, quite cheap on ebay.
Finally, although it's not a 'fast' lens, don't rule out the Pentax 55-300; you can buy the DA L version for about £150 brand new and it's a stonker of a lens for that money. The portraits I've shot with the 55-300 have turned out great.
Regards
David
Thats a really nice portrait David. Is the takumar similar to the M 135mm 3.5...I would echo what Robbiec has said above about the K55 F1.8. What a lens this is - super sharp and wonderful rendering of colour and bokeh. I would also consider something like a SMC Takumar 135mm F3.5 if you want one at the longer end. I did a shoot last year and this was the lens I used the most - it rendered the models in a very flattering way (example posted below, shot wide open at F3.5). This lens cost me £22 so it is an excellent 'starter' and one to hone your manual focussing skills on. BTW, with this lens you'll need an M42 to K mount adaptor, quite cheap on ebay.
Finally, although it's not a 'fast' lens, don't rule out the Pentax 55-300; you can buy the DA L version for about £150 brand new and it's a stonker of a lens for that money. The portraits I've shot with the 55-300 have turned out great.
Regards
David
Comment by cabstar posted on Portrait lens at 18/03/2013 - 20:44
steven9761 wrote:
Gary - is it just me that thinks that in the last photo, the guy in the glasses has been badly photoshopped into the picture??
Haha it does a bit, he was getting right dragged aout Gary - is it just me that thinks that in the last photo, the guy in the glasses has been badly photoshopped into the picture??
Comment by cabstar posted on Some club photography and the poorly reviewed DA* 16-50mm k-5 mkii at 18/03/2013 - 20:39
Back working at the club again. The club is really dark and with my original K-5 I had to use manual focus and zonal as it was just too dark for the suto focus to work.
Cue arrival of the MKii and it works a treat in the club, even focussing on blacked out silhouettes!!!
I love the combination of the mkii and the DA* 16-50mm. I wish I had bought one years ago now...
So on with the pix
all on the following settings
Manual mode
ISO 800
f/5.6
Shutter between 0.5" to 1/20
Metz 48 af 1 at 1/16 or 1/8 for group shots.
Cue arrival of the MKii and it works a treat in the club, even focussing on blacked out silhouettes!!!
I love the combination of the mkii and the DA* 16-50mm. I wish I had bought one years ago now...
So on with the pix
all on the following settings
Manual mode
ISO 800
f/5.6
Shutter between 0.5" to 1/20
Metz 48 af 1 at 1/16 or 1/8 for group shots.
Comment by cabstar posted on Some club photography and the poorly reviewed DA* 16-50mm k-5 mkii at 18/03/2013 - 19:57
OK I just read the conclusions of that review again, been a whilst and I remember it being fairly negative as have most reviews of the 16-50mm I know because I owned a Tamron for nearly four years!!!
Whilst the Tamron had good IQ quality the build quality was truly dreadful, if you search the internet you will see a lot of problems with the front elemant coming loose, mine did on a regular basis. Which whilst I could fix easily ddn't fill me with confidence.
The zoom ring seemed tight and always had resistance to it, whilst the focus on Pentax always hunted and was slow too.
The Tamron is lightwight with a 67mm front element and balanced well on the GX20 and teh K-5
The DA* 16-50mm I love and do not regret getting it for one moment, I did buy mine second-hand paid I think £400 for it. I didnt want to risk a new one due to the reviews and factored in the cost of a focus repair, which I havent needed yet and I use it alot!!!
The DA* 16-50mm does have its faults though, its heavy having a 77mm front elemant, the zoom extends alot at 50mm again making handling heavy.
A lot of the reviews claim at 2.8 its soft, I didn't think it was, as this shows. Both in natural light no flash used.
A larger image can be seen here
I was really pleased with my copy and I take around 600 shots a week with mine working in a nightclub I needed weather resistance due to drinks being thrown around
I should also point out that focussing is faster on the Pentax and locks on quicker with the original K-5 than the Tamron did, the Pentax also hunts alot less on the original K-5.
The only negatives are the weight and the strange distortion at 16mm which Lightroom profiles seem to exacerbate .
So would I buy a Pentax DA* 16-50mm again? Yes any day over the Tamron
Whilst the Tamron had good IQ quality the build quality was truly dreadful, if you search the internet you will see a lot of problems with the front elemant coming loose, mine did on a regular basis. Which whilst I could fix easily ddn't fill me with confidence.
The zoom ring seemed tight and always had resistance to it, whilst the focus on Pentax always hunted and was slow too.
The Tamron is lightwight with a 67mm front element and balanced well on the GX20 and teh K-5
The DA* 16-50mm I love and do not regret getting it for one moment, I did buy mine second-hand paid I think £400 for it. I didnt want to risk a new one due to the reviews and factored in the cost of a focus repair, which I havent needed yet and I use it alot!!!
The DA* 16-50mm does have its faults though, its heavy having a 77mm front elemant, the zoom extends alot at 50mm again making handling heavy.
A lot of the reviews claim at 2.8 its soft, I didn't think it was, as this shows. Both in natural light no flash used.
A larger image can be seen here
I was really pleased with my copy and I take around 600 shots a week with mine working in a nightclub I needed weather resistance due to drinks being thrown around
I should also point out that focussing is faster on the Pentax and locks on quicker with the original K-5 than the Tamron did, the Pentax also hunts alot less on the original K-5.
The only negatives are the weight and the strange distortion at 16mm which Lightroom profiles seem to exacerbate .
So would I buy a Pentax DA* 16-50mm again? Yes any day over the Tamron
Comment by cabstar posted on Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 vs. Pentax DA* 16-50 f/2.8 at 17/03/2013 - 22:31
Jonathan-Mac wrote:
I have one. I bought it ex-demo and it arrived with a broken zoom function. After repair it works perfectly and produces good results. I haven't used the PTTL yet, just manual mode. If you're not going to need PTTL then there are better-built Yongnuo models with a little more power at half the price, but I think the Metz 44 is a good buy for a basic PTTL flash. You should be able to get one for that price.
I would argue the youngnou flashes are built less well than the Metz. My Metz 48 has outlived three 560mkii flashes which all stopped working...I have one. I bought it ex-demo and it arrived with a broken zoom function. After repair it works perfectly and produces good results. I haven't used the PTTL yet, just manual mode. If you're not going to need PTTL then there are better-built Yongnuo models with a little more power at half the price, but I think the Metz 44 is a good buy for a basic PTTL flash. You should be able to get one for that price.
Comment by cabstar posted on Metz 44 af-1. Opinions please at 17/03/2013 - 10:52
I wanted to get a think tank airport navigator but they don't do one that fits a 17" laptop so went for a Domke 220.
I thought Domke was a good brand of bag???
I thought Domke was a good brand of bag???
Comment by cabstar posted on Rain and Domke bags at 17/03/2013 - 10:49
