I concur with Stuey on the M28 F3.5. It is probably worth a tad more than £40 if in mint condition, but I wouldn't part with mine for £400 let alone £40. It's a superb lens.

Regards
David

Edit: Actually, I would part with it for £400 because I could buy another for £50 or so and spend the rest on other lenses!

Great images Alistair, looks like the trademark of the 50-135 to me?

Regards
David

I post this image not for constructive criticism nor for its merit as a photograph. I post it because of the beauty of nature and how amazing it is. I found this Small Tortoiseshell Chrysallis this afternoon in the 'wild area' of our garden, a space which I have planted with wild flowers and grasses, then left it to its own devices. The result is a small area of diverse habitat, with a large sunny nettle bed in one corner. This is buzzing with life and covered in Tortoiseshell and Comma Caterpillars.

This Tortoiseshell Chrysallis must have only just pupated when I found it, as they don't stay this colour for long. It looked like a golden jewel.

Shot with the K-5IIs and DFA 100 F2.8 WR Macro lens.




Regards
David

Just checked mine Alan, there is definitely a different sound to the two shutters, I'm not sure if one is louder than the other though. The K-5IIs has a 'softer' noise, not in volume, but in terms of the character of the noise. I can't feel any difference in the vibration between the two. What I do notice is the dramatic difference when I use my old K-x, this vibrates noticeably through the camera body and is a lot louder than either the K-5 or the K-3.

Regards
David

You're right about the focussing on the K-5 Jeremy, but this was addressed with the K-5II variants, they are a big step up from the original K-5 for AF accuracy and can focus in near darkness.

Regards
David

Is it Alan? I haven't noticed this, I can't tell the difference between my K-5IIs and my K-3 in terms of the sound or vibration.

Regards
David

I agree with you Jeremy, but you made a specific point about the shutter which was incorrect and I was just pointing out that the K-5 shutter is better because it is quieter and induces less vibration. It is specifically engineered with increased damping, therefore it is better than the one on the K30.

The K30 is definitely not an entry level camera and has great features, but there are aspects of the K-5 series the K-5IIs a better camera than the K30. Whether or not it is sufficiently better to justify an upgrade from the K30 is subjective, some will say it is, some will say it isn't.

Regards
David

It does make a difference and a significant one in some circumstances. The shutter on the K-5 variants produces less vibration and therefore shots are less likely to have shutter induced camera shake, which can mean a much sharper image. I think this is quite a major deal and was certainly one of the reasons I upgraded to a K-5 in the first place. My upgrade was from a K-x, but the same principle applies.

I also find it hard to understand how you can say that the K-5 isn't far superior to the K30. How do you know this?

Regards
David

Thank you Nigel, when taking images of insects / butterflies, the first thought in my mind is always the background. If the subject is too close to background distractions, i.e. anything that can't be blurred out at the chosen aperture, I generally don't bother to take the shot, or if I do it gets discarded.

I'm glad you like the way they are framed as this is also something foremost in my mind when taking the shots. I like to see living things in the context of their surroundings and although the backgrounds are blurred out, there is context in these because of what the insects are clinging to. I've tried to use this in the composition, hopefully it has worked OK.

Best wishes
David

Great shots Neil and very interesting to see these strange creatures that are not so familiar to us.

Regards
David