Did someone mention my name?

I have been absent for quite some time, and really clearly shouldn't still be shown as a Mod any more. I don't think it was any one thing that caused me to drift away, mainly the over all tone of the forum at the time, and just wanting to spend less time at the computer really, business was really starting to pick up and this place just took up a lot of time.

I've had the pleasure of reviewing the KP, K-1 and K-70 (as well as the K-3 four years ago) for Outdoor Photography mag, but you do get such a short period of time with the camera you can't find every foible (I had the K-1 and the K-70 at the same time, for just one week). My main gripe with the KP was the small buffer, really quite frustrating for a raw shooter trying to do bursts of shots of birds in flight and the like.

Anyway, thought I'd swing by and say hello, I may well pop back a little more often, but I can't promise anything.

I see a few Pentax users about, and they appear with some sort of frequency on workshops, but generally it's predominantly Canon and Nikon for SLRs, and Panasonic, Canon or Sony for compacts/bridge cameras. A small proportion use CSCs, mainly Sony or Panasonic, had my first Canon 'M' the other week, despite Canon claiming it's the highest selling CSC in the UK. Not many Olys turn up either.

I still vividly remember the day when I had 4 Pentax users (including myself), 3 Sony, and just one each of Canon and Nikon.

Dan

Right, here's mine, seems to be missing the 'I' that everyone else has.

K-3 with 3 extension tubes, DA*300mm + reversed 16-45 @ 16mm. Close, but not very sharp...


1.5s, f/11, ISO100

And the set-up I used.




That's it, not trying it again! Moving house soon, and I've got stuff to do!

Dan

Yeah, I didn't get as close as I did last time, had a go this morning, will post result later. Better quality though. But that might mean that I lose out on the skinflint prize, I was using my DA*300 with the 16-45 reversed on the front, with a few extension tubes. Started off using the Sigma 10-20 reversed, but results, although higher magnification, were worse quality. Live view made it so much easier than last time, but it still took an age to get it lined up and focused.

Dan

Oh dear Mark, what have you (re)started?? I may just have to see what I can do...

Might have to get my bellows back off NeilP!

Hmmm, just been having a quick play, and have been looking at an image width of 4 pixels on my monitor. As in, pointing the camera/lenses combo at my monitor, and seeing 4 individual pixels through the viewfinder. And that was without any extension tubes...

Dan

Glad it worked for you Dennis.

Dan

Page 55 of the manual is the place to look - the start time is the actual time, according to the time you have set the camera to, that you want the shooting to start, so 22:30 if you want it to start at 10:30pm for example. You just press the shutter button to start the process going, but it won't actually take a shot until the allotted time.

Dan

Well if you're going to quote, at least quote it accurately.

Likes: Improved Autofocus

Dislikes: Autofocus could still be better

I think that's fair. I liked that the autofocus was much better, but was a bit disappointed it still fell short in some areas. It was about 93.8% as good as I'd have liked.

Dan

And that's why I said "you don't need to pay it any attention", not "Don't pay it any attention." I was giving you the choice. I'm nice like that.

Have you read the review? You know those things are there? Just with the addition of the percentage bits. So, just don't read those bits, if they offend you so highly. Obviously that's not a command, just a suggestion.

By that logic, you're just as upset as I am, and as I presume you're not upset, then that proves neither am I.

I was just a little irked to see that it seemed to be suggested that I was getting upset by this whole thing. I'm simply not, I wouldn't be smirking as I write this if I was. I was just answering as best I could the questions and points raised by yourself and Nigel. And bemused, yes. Because I think there are many things to get 'upset' about, but I just don't see this as one of them. As you say, each to their own. And I'm glad you and I are different, I think being you would do my head in after a while.

Dan

And once again, just in case anyone missed it, I'm not upset, just somewhat bemused. Perhaps you weren't directing that at me, but it seemed to me that you were.

Percentages, or star ratings, or thumbs up, or whatever scoring system, is used for just about every review on the planet, whether it's cameras, music, films, inkjet paper, videos of cats playing the piano, or chocolate biscuits. If the mark is higher, the subject of the review is considered better than things with a lower score, by whoever is doing the review. They may have different tastes to you, they may never have had a McDingles Shortcake Choccobiccy, or maybe their review was written before such a delight was ever dreamed of, and you may disagree with their verdict, or the basis upon which it was derived, or in any other of a multitude of ways, to your heart's content. If you don't like the system, you don't need to pay it any attention. If you come up with a better system, feel free to let the world's media know.

Dan