All Forum Comments
Looks VERY good, sharp, punchy, yet with that reserved 'Pentax' colour reproduction. Very nice
Comment by Dodge69 posted on MX-1 images at 11/02/2013 - 20:58
LOL - top marks for a bit of pro-active marketing
Comment by Dodge69 posted on How the mighty have fallen. at 09/02/2013 - 11:59
Ahh yes I easily remember that one from the Gallery, still outstanding, one of the very few times I've thought 'I'd like a print of that'
Very well done
Very well done
Comment by Dodge69 posted on World Photography Organisation Awards at 07/02/2013 - 16:51
Looks cool. Similar effects in the 'Star Gate' sequence from '2001 A Space Odyssey'.
If it was good enough for Stanley Kubrick.....
If it was good enough for Stanley Kubrick.....
Comment by Dodge69 posted on Water turned to fire at 07/02/2013 - 10:52
LOL
For a second I was thinking the fail was that he somehow had his flash pointing backwards - then....
For a second I was thinking the fail was that he somehow had his flash pointing backwards - then....
Comment by Dodge69 posted on wedding photographer fail at 03/02/2013 - 00:54
Smeggypants Feb 1st, 2013 5:09PM
"A Tokina employee revealed " = Story is made up.
More Pentax news at: http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/tokina-confirms-pentax-full-frame-under-develop...#ixzz2Jh1DVR5h
LOL
For more Pentax FF news, eat some cheese, drink some wine, go to bed and let your imagination go wild
"A Tokina employee revealed " = Story is made up.
More Pentax news at: http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/tokina-confirms-pentax-full-frame-under-develop...#ixzz2Jh1DVR5h
LOL
For more Pentax FF news, eat some cheese, drink some wine, go to bed and let your imagination go wild
Comment by Dodge69 posted on Full Frame getting closer ? at 01/02/2013 - 23:33
Yes, kinda agree with Algi. This just seems like a mute issue. All lenses are different all have have got a sweet point. All togs maybe different, along with the conditions, so subjective opinion is guaranteed. I only rave about my old lenses, but would I take them to a wedding or any other payed work? No.
My favorite rendering lenses are:
Da40 - Srs - load a dosh
Zeiss Jenna 135 - charity shop - 30 quid (inc Praktica SLR)
Interestingly both at opposite ends of 'the ease of use' spectrum. One old one new. Go figure.
My favorite rendering lenses are:
Da40 - Srs - load a dosh
Zeiss Jenna 135 - charity shop - 30 quid (inc Praktica SLR)
Interestingly both at opposite ends of 'the ease of use' spectrum. One old one new. Go figure.
Comment by Dodge69 posted on Old Lenses - Better Images? at 01/02/2013 - 15:56
If you've got the cash your gonna buy the 'top model' aren't you?
John's review, from a general audience point of view, certainly throws a lot enthusiasm at the reader, It would get me considering it. (Though I maintain the D800 is a different beast. Given the compactness of K5 & Limited's, wouldn't the Fuji 16mp X-Trans models be a closer competitor?)
However I am finding the AA-filter-less issue to be highly suspect. All the reviews for the D800, Fuji X-trans & K5IIs clearly give the overwhelming opinion that AA-filter worries over moire, colour reproduction etc.. are now unfounded. The advantages of no AA filter have also been known for years.
From a suspicious viewpoint, it makes one wonder whether manufacturers have been purposefully dumbing down they're consumer cameras, while the high end machines have them removed?
Given the positive reviews, shouldn't all new releases from now on be AA-filter-less? Conversely we have been getting along fine all these years 'with', with no major clamor for 'without'?
I'll wager the AA-filter-less will become, if it hasn't already, a marketing gimmick. Like a sports car company offering a 'top model' - it goes 5mph faster, because we've stripped out the carpets and stereo system.
Of course, as bloke if I can afford the extra £££, I'm gonna want that top model
John's review, from a general audience point of view, certainly throws a lot enthusiasm at the reader, It would get me considering it. (Though I maintain the D800 is a different beast. Given the compactness of K5 & Limited's, wouldn't the Fuji 16mp X-Trans models be a closer competitor?)
However I am finding the AA-filter-less issue to be highly suspect. All the reviews for the D800, Fuji X-trans & K5IIs clearly give the overwhelming opinion that AA-filter worries over moire, colour reproduction etc.. are now unfounded. The advantages of no AA filter have also been known for years.
From a suspicious viewpoint, it makes one wonder whether manufacturers have been purposefully dumbing down they're consumer cameras, while the high end machines have them removed?
Given the positive reviews, shouldn't all new releases from now on be AA-filter-less? Conversely we have been getting along fine all these years 'with', with no major clamor for 'without'?
I'll wager the AA-filter-less will become, if it hasn't already, a marketing gimmick. Like a sports car company offering a 'top model' - it goes 5mph faster, because we've stripped out the carpets and stereo system.
Of course, as bloke if I can afford the extra £££, I'm gonna want that top model
Comment by Dodge69 posted on JR K5 IIs review at 28/01/2013 - 18:25
Smeggypants wrote:
What I find fascinating is the hyperbole ...
LOL, the hyperbole is funny, however I'm more flabbergasted with the references to the Nikon 800E, particularly:What I find fascinating is the hyperbole ...
"There is currently a £130 street price difference between the K-5 II and K-5 IIs bodies. However, the K-5 IIs is also, on the same basis, £1490 less expensive than a Nikon D800E, the only other option with no AA filter. I see it as excellent value for money."
LOL! How can the 800E be mentioned in the same review as a K5? I don't own a 800e and have no intention of owning one, but compare the images from Ephotozine reviews of the 800E and K5IIs. No download required no messing about in Photoshop, the differences in quality is there on the screen?! Actual visible differences unlike the K5IIs vs K5II. Or K5IIs/K5II vs K5 MkI. Or K5 whatever vs any similar APS-C body on the market.
Comment by Dodge69 posted on JR K5 IIs review at 26/01/2013 - 10:59
It's ALL good! It's like Disney land for urban photography. I would just go out and feel the streets, Little Italy/Chinatown is great, Central Park really good, Brooklyn, all the bridges. Try and walk as much as you can, get the subway in the morning to get your to a starting point/tourist destination, get it home, but walk around in random directions as much as you can. I remember ending up at free concert at South Street Seaport by just doing that, fantastic evening.
Keep the day kit to a minimum. Next time I go I think I could easily survive with the 21 & 40, though I'd probably take my F50 1.4 instead of the 40, its a bit more creative and your always likely to be out late.
First time I went I took the kit 18-55 & 50-200, they work great, very light and great focal coverage. The one thing I did miss was the Siggy UWA, that should be a must for a first timer, but if you've spent some decent time there you've probably got most of the skylines & toursity up shots of skyscrapers you want and that everybody else has.
It's all on the streets. Hope that helps
Keep the day kit to a minimum. Next time I go I think I could easily survive with the 21 & 40, though I'd probably take my F50 1.4 instead of the 40, its a bit more creative and your always likely to be out late.
First time I went I took the kit 18-55 & 50-200, they work great, very light and great focal coverage. The one thing I did miss was the Siggy UWA, that should be a must for a first timer, but if you've spent some decent time there you've probably got most of the skylines & toursity up shots of skyscrapers you want and that everybody else has.
It's all on the streets. Hope that helps
