All Forum Comments
Comment by davidstorm posted on k-5 and FA50 f1.4 losing autofocus.. at 20/09/2013 - 23:45
I'm not in a camera club so I have nothing to worry about! I prefer to be in a minority though and it always seems to attract attention and questions when out and about, especially from Canon and Nikon users!
Regards
David
Regards
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on Canon or Nikon? at 20/09/2013 - 13:26
Exiles wrote:
If there is somewhere a k-5 mkI that works fine then there is something that can be done to sort the focusing problem out.., if not there is no chance to keep the camera..
Unfortunately I see apart from one or two cases (Mr Riley's for example) that this model is faulty, worse than that nobody somehow solved the problem. Am I right ?
There are plenty of K-5's out there that focus fine - they all have a 'II' on the end of their model name!If there is somewhere a k-5 mkI that works fine then there is something that can be done to sort the focusing problem out.., if not there is no chance to keep the camera..
Unfortunately I see apart from one or two cases (Mr Riley's for example) that this model is faulty, worse than that nobody somehow solved the problem. Am I right ?
Sorry to be a bit sarcastic, but the focussing on the K-5II and K-5IIs is light years ahead of the Mk1. That's not to say you won't get good shots with the Mk1, but the keeper rate with the later versions is so much higher, particularly if you're using wide aperture lenses with thin depth of field.
Regards
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on k-5 and FA50 f1.4 losing autofocus.. at 19/09/2013 - 23:49
I agree with Gary (cabstar) that the problem is most likely with the K-5 mk1. I have the same issues with mine, on all AF lenses. It's impossible to calibrate as sometimes it back focusses and sometimes it front focusses, not just in poor light either. No such issues with the K-5iis and the same lenses, focus is nailed every time.
I don't think it's a fault that has 'developed', it's a characteristic of the K-5 mk1 cameras.
Regards
David
I don't think it's a fault that has 'developed', it's a characteristic of the K-5 mk1 cameras.
Regards
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on k-5 and FA50 f1.4 losing autofocus.. at 19/09/2013 - 23:21
I hope it's going with you on Saturday?
Cheers
David
Cheers
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on FS: PENTAX DA 1:4 17-70 AL [IF] SDM at 19/09/2013 - 23:13
I have the Sigma 70-300 and the Pentax 55-300. The Pentax trounces it completely for image quality, no contest and consequently the Sigma is hardly ever used. I really cannot understand the findings of the Practical Photography review, they must have had a duff sample.
No, it's not great at AF, but for everything else it punches way above its price range and it's one lens I would never be without.
Regards
David
No, it's not great at AF, but for everything else it punches way above its price range and it's one lens I would never be without.
Regards
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on Pentax 55-300mm or Pentax f 80-320mm ? at 19/09/2013 - 23:12
sbrads wrote:
Most old Pentax primes are manual focus, certainly the cheap ones are. As long as that's OK, then yes the good ones are better than the kit lens and obviously much brighter having wide apertures. K and M lenses are MF and manual exposure or green button stop-down metering, later A lenses are auto exposure but still MF.
One example I can give is that my SMC K55/1.8 on a K-30 shows a lot more fine detail on distant landscapes than does my year old DA35/2.4, perhaps not a good comparison because of the different focal lengths, but it's impressive. It's not just sharper, you can see things that just don't even exist on the 35/2.4 or my Sigma 17-70, both of which are good examples, nowt wrong with them comparing to others. The only 18-55 kit lens I've had was from 2006 and the Sigma was a lot better than that, but newer kit lenses are supposed to be better than that 2006 one.
One area some old primes may be less good in is contrast, not all are equal to lenses using modern coatings. 50 and 55mm lenses would be a good place to start, they give good contrast once you've stopped down slightly and are really excellent by f2.8.
Very good advice here. Also, contrast is not really an issue as it can be increased later. The SMC K55 F1.8 is a gem of a lens, as is the Pentax-A 50mm F1.7 (although the build quality on this one is not so good). Others worth looking out for are the Pentax-M 50mm F1.4 and a real cracker is the Pentax-M 28mm F3.5 (this is rarer and better than the 28mm F2.8 variant, but not too hard to find). A really cheap one that is plentiful and produces fine images is the Chinon 50mm F1.9.Most old Pentax primes are manual focus, certainly the cheap ones are. As long as that's OK, then yes the good ones are better than the kit lens and obviously much brighter having wide apertures. K and M lenses are MF and manual exposure or green button stop-down metering, later A lenses are auto exposure but still MF.
One example I can give is that my SMC K55/1.8 on a K-30 shows a lot more fine detail on distant landscapes than does my year old DA35/2.4, perhaps not a good comparison because of the different focal lengths, but it's impressive. It's not just sharper, you can see things that just don't even exist on the 35/2.4 or my Sigma 17-70, both of which are good examples, nowt wrong with them comparing to others. The only 18-55 kit lens I've had was from 2006 and the Sigma was a lot better than that, but newer kit lenses are supposed to be better than that 2006 one.
One area some old primes may be less good in is contrast, not all are equal to lenses using modern coatings. 50 and 55mm lenses would be a good place to start, they give good contrast once you've stopped down slightly and are really excellent by f2.8.
Regards
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on Older Pentax primes at 19/09/2013 - 23:03
stalky wrote:
Anything you'd recommend to have a play with ?
I would start with one of the Pentax 50mm / 55mm variants, Pentax-A F1.7, Pentax-M F1.4 or F1.7, or SMC K55 F1.8.Anything you'd recommend to have a play with ?
All of these are superb lenses; the easiest to find are the M's and A's. For a first lens the A series are the best as they have automatic apertures, so easier to use on a DSLR.
I would also recommend some extension tubes and have a go at macro. These images were shot in exactly this way:
Pentax-A 50mm F1.7
Pentax K55 F1.8
Pentax-M 50mm F1.4
I think the average amount I paid for these lenses was about £60 each, so they are not too expensive.
Regards
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on Using Old Pentax Lenses on Newer Pentax Cameras at 19/09/2013 - 22:55
Hello and welcome Ian, old glass is good, looking forward to seeing some of your images shot with it!
Best wishes
David
Best wishes
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on Hello Pentax Fanatics! at 18/09/2013 - 22:10
Pentaxophile wrote:
These are rather stunning David. That old 28/3.5's still going strong! I love mine too.
Many thanks Will, I appreciate this. I won't ever sell the M28 F3.5, I like it far too much. I do find it has a tendency to over emphasise purple tones, but I can live with that!These are rather stunning David. That old 28/3.5's still going strong! I love mine too.
Regards
David
Comment by davidstorm posted on An Elizabethan Masterpiece at 18/09/2013 - 18:02
I took some test shots again and it's disappointing, it was set at -4 giving a raw of fair results in the afternoon, I had to take it to -7 some shots ago and now it back focuses thus I have to move the adjustment again which is meaningless.
I don't now what to do, excuse my whining but I really feel stupid to make sacrifices and wait so long to get my hands on a K-5
By comparison, the K-5iis is superb and inspires confidence every time I use it. BTW, before anyone comments, the camera has already been back to Pentax for calibration, but it's not the calibration that is the issue, it is the inconsistent nature of the AF.
Reading John's comments, I think he has been extremely lucky with his cameras to not experience this, but I have to say that at last Pentax have nailed the AF with the K-5II and IIS variants and have probably exceeded the performance of other Brands, except for focus tracking, which I don't use anyway.
Regards
David