All Forum Comments
looks like a candy wrapper to me..
Comment by Don posted on Any ideas what they are? at 02/01/2011 - 17:41
ChrisA wrote:
I remember being deeply disappointed, almost four years ago now, when I finally splashed out on the K10D, to discover that the stop-down-metering mode simply didn't work right. It's old news now, but I was quite wound up about it at the time.
The wireless flash issue reported by others, and this tungsten light AF issue do seem to point to a very poor standard of testing by the manufacturer. Neither is a particularly obscure condition, and it's not acceptable IMO for Pentax to miss them.
There's plenty of anecdotal noise on that thread, and there are some who haven't experienced the issue (which, incidentally, is very different from there being no issue), and there seems to be a lack of clarity as to what the precise issue actually is.
But there are clearly a number who are experiencing low-light- and/or tungsten-light-related AF issues. And it also seems that Pentax Spain has acknowledged it.
It does the cause no service at all to minimise such issues.
it also is counterproductive to blow the issue out of proportion.johnriley wrote:
Not sure how much it's developed since you posted this, but there doesn't seem to be much support of the same intensity as the OP!
I don't think the OP's intensity is unreasonable. He's clearly a passionate guy, who expects a top-of-the-range camera that he's spent about £1000 on to actually work. He's very disappointed to discover what seems to be quite a serious issue, and I don't blame him.Not sure how much it's developed since you posted this, but there doesn't seem to be much support of the same intensity as the OP!
I remember being deeply disappointed, almost four years ago now, when I finally splashed out on the K10D, to discover that the stop-down-metering mode simply didn't work right. It's old news now, but I was quite wound up about it at the time.
The wireless flash issue reported by others, and this tungsten light AF issue do seem to point to a very poor standard of testing by the manufacturer. Neither is a particularly obscure condition, and it's not acceptable IMO for Pentax to miss them.
There's plenty of anecdotal noise on that thread, and there are some who haven't experienced the issue (which, incidentally, is very different from there being no issue), and there seems to be a lack of clarity as to what the precise issue actually is.
But there are clearly a number who are experiencing low-light- and/or tungsten-light-related AF issues. And it also seems that Pentax Spain has acknowledged it.
It does the cause no service at all to minimise such issues.
These cameras are hybrids of old technology mechanical engineering miniaturized and precise like wind up watches combined with computer technology.
Anybody that opts in for the first production run with version one firmware ought to to do so with the knowledge that they are in fact the first public beta testers. You cannot and will not find every bug in lab testing because the labs cannot predict nor replicate every scenario possible in the real world.
Even this forum is pushing Pentax to deal with the issues as many people may have gone for years without noticing the flaws in the past. Sharing the info does make the problem appear bigger than it really is more often than not.
other brands have and will have similar problems as well.
Comment by Don posted on K-5 AF under tungsten light issue .... at 02/01/2011 - 17:36
Pentaxophile wrote:
That's very nice bokeh Don. I think it is beginning to make more sense to keep hold of the 16-45 and a couple of primes than upgrade the zoom to a constant f2.8 (even if I had the money, I would take the Tamron over the Pentax one I think!) The K-7 just cries out for a nice prime lens to make the most of it's compact size and excellent IQ.
That is my reasoning as well.That's very nice bokeh Don. I think it is beginning to make more sense to keep hold of the 16-45 and a couple of primes than upgrade the zoom to a constant f2.8 (even if I had the money, I would take the Tamron over the Pentax one I think!) The K-7 just cries out for a nice prime lens to make the most of it's compact size and excellent IQ.
for less than the price of the star zoom, I got the 16-45, 50 1.4 and 35 2.4 which has me adequately covered...
there isn't a lot of money to be made even if you're a pro around here, so my options are to watch what we spend or move to Toronto or Vancouver....
Comment by Don posted on Tamron 17-50mm... or go for a prime?! at 02/01/2011 - 16:16
ah that it explains it.. the manfrotto 475 b should be solid enough to hold 20 kilograms!
it boils down to what has already been said... you get what you pay for..
solid, light, cheap... pick one and be prepared to compromise on the other two... if you can get two out of three consider yourself fortunate....
My advice when buying a tripod.... buy big or resign yourself to the reality that you WILL be buying twice.
it boils down to what has already been said... you get what you pay for..
solid, light, cheap... pick one and be prepared to compromise on the other two... if you can get two out of three consider yourself fortunate....
My advice when buying a tripod.... buy big or resign yourself to the reality that you WILL be buying twice.
Comment by Don posted on Big, strong, cheap, and light tripods? at 02/01/2011 - 12:06
Unlocker wrote:
I've got one of those Don, and guess what? It's up for sale as it's not stable enough!
if the manfrotto 475 b isn't stabil enough, you may have to refer back to my first post and just clamp the camera to a truck.I've got one of those Don, and guess what? It's up for sale as it's not stable enough!
Comment by Don posted on Big, strong, cheap, and light tripods? at 02/01/2011 - 02:16
whelmed wrote:
Odd - just realized I didn't hit add comment so my post disappeared! Whoops! It's really been one of those weeks of misplacing things.
I found the tripod and tried it out with my camera and 70-200mm f2.8 siggy, however being one of those days I couldn't find the lens collar to mount the tripod to the lens. Thus I was trying it with mounting at the body and it really wasn't that stable. I could visually see lens motion even after using a 2 second delay timer prior to taking an image. The tripod seems a bit on the cheap side with no markings on it other than made in china, but I also wonder how much more stable more expensive ones are as just walking on the floor caused enough motion to be seen at the end of the lens. Below is a pic of the tripod, thoughts? I want stable above all else so what's the answer?
Odd - just realized I didn't hit add comment so my post disappeared! Whoops! It's really been one of those weeks of misplacing things.
I found the tripod and tried it out with my camera and 70-200mm f2.8 siggy, however being one of those days I couldn't find the lens collar to mount the tripod to the lens. Thus I was trying it with mounting at the body and it really wasn't that stable. I could visually see lens motion even after using a 2 second delay timer prior to taking an image. The tripod seems a bit on the cheap side with no markings on it other than made in china, but I also wonder how much more stable more expensive ones are as just walking on the floor caused enough motion to be seen at the end of the lens. Below is a pic of the tripod, thoughts? I want stable above all else so what's the answer?
manfrotto. go big or go home.
Comment by Don posted on Big, strong, cheap, and light tripods? at 02/01/2011 - 02:08
Dangermouse wrote:
I do wonder if the lack of interest in the kit lens is because most of us played with it a fair bit when we first bought the camera, then got bored and moved on to more intriguing oddballs. Mine never leaves the camera bag as it's the only true wide angle I have for digital, but I tend to leave the DA 35mm f2.4 on the camera now as it's smaller and faster.
At least try the DA 35mm, if the focal length suits you it's a brilliant lens and very sensibly priced compared to their other primes. I was a bit uncertain about it at first as I used to use a 28mm prime (manual focus but compact and incredibly sharp so worth the effort) but to be honest the slightly narrower field of view isn't a problem.
I do wonder if the lack of interest in the kit lens is because most of us played with it a fair bit when we first bought the camera, then got bored and moved on to more intriguing oddballs. Mine never leaves the camera bag as it's the only true wide angle I have for digital, but I tend to leave the DA 35mm f2.4 on the camera now as it's smaller and faster.
At least try the DA 35mm, if the focal length suits you it's a brilliant lens and very sensibly priced compared to their other primes. I was a bit uncertain about it at first as I used to use a 28mm prime (manual focus but compact and incredibly sharp so worth the effort) but to be honest the slightly narrower field of view isn't a problem.
jpeg out of camera just a little sharpening in aperture...hand held, f 2.4 1/5sec with fill flash. iso 100 k10
not too shabby... IMHO
Comment by Don posted on Tamron 17-50mm... or go for a prime?! at 02/01/2011 - 01:55
link
interesting read....
also flip over to Popular Photography and look at the first three (or four) winners for thier best of the year awards... then tell me I'm wrong about where Pentax needs to focus...
you combine all of the main features of those cameras in one... and you wind up with exactly what I'm saying Pentax could make the kx into.
now is the time for Pentax to jump into the video d-slr market..... Pentax primes on a small lightweight pelicile mirrored kx with a real glass pentaprism viewfinder.... won't gut sales from Pentax's existing d-slr lineup but would appeal to both evil buyers and sony/canon video shooters.
Priced at the kx's price point.
interesting read....
also flip over to Popular Photography and look at the first three (or four) winners for thier best of the year awards... then tell me I'm wrong about where Pentax needs to focus...
you combine all of the main features of those cameras in one... and you wind up with exactly what I'm saying Pentax could make the kx into.
now is the time for Pentax to jump into the video d-slr market..... Pentax primes on a small lightweight pelicile mirrored kx with a real glass pentaprism viewfinder.... won't gut sales from Pentax's existing d-slr lineup but would appeal to both evil buyers and sony/canon video shooters.
Priced at the kx's price point.
Comment by Don posted on Please Pentax, Pleeease! at 01/01/2011 - 19:21
Pentaxophile wrote:
the three things people look for in an evil:mowog wrote:
Yes, I think they are lousy... And yes, I have tried other brands.
Have you tried an LX3? From what I've seen, definitely the best IQ of any compact.Yes, I think they are lousy... And yes, I have tried other brands.
Don wrote:
avchd or h264 video compression
Can we have the option of regular AVI as well please Don, so I can actually play these files back on my PC? Ta!avchd or h264 video compression
Small size.
decent stills.
decent video.
I'm afraid Pentax will have to really focus on video for such a camera to distinguish itself from the existing lineup.... and come paired with the new 35mm lens which, BTW I'm impressed with.
They could even brand it as the new Pentax E(vi) L X.
Comment by Don posted on Please Pentax, Pleeease! at 01/01/2011 - 18:30
mowog wrote:
Chrissinkpen.
Yes, I think they are lousy... And yes, I have tried other brands.
The great majority of the kind of photography I like to do most, is done with Canon digital compacts and ancient Olympus film compacts. The Canons are an A70 and an S40. Both of them are very old models. The sad thing is, they are still much better built and produce better images than any Pentax compact available NOW!. That is a disgrace for Pentax.
The RS-1000 is typical of Pentax thought process. It can do lots of clever things. It has an ingenious face detection system that delays the shutter until the face is smiling. It can't produce a decent image above 400 ISO, but can recognise teeth!. It also has the vital feature of being able to have bits of vinyl crap stuck on the front. You can even print your own. Perhaps they hope you can print VIVITAR on one of the skins and stick that on. It would be more in keeping with the quality of this camera.
The I-10 is smarter still. It's face recognition system not only works for humans, but pets, too! Yes indeed. The image quality is bad, but it can recognise dear little Tiddles, so the IQ doesn't matter.
Pentax compact cameras are a stain on the Pentax name. The company is rightly respected for It's Dslrs. It has upped I'ts game in that division recently and is now reaping the rewards, shifting tons of K5s K-Rs and K-Xs. A top quality EVIL system to go along with the fine Dslrs and lenses would put Pentax back where it belongs. Seen as a quality maufacturer.
Pentax compacts are low end. Better leave that market to Vivitar, Kodak, Bush and Goodmans. Argos catalogue crap for the masses. Pentax should not make any camera that costs under £300. I want high quality photographic tools from Pentax. Products that continue It's heritage and reputation as a producer of the finest optical instruments... Not stupid little plastic point and shoot dross, full of monkey tennis gimmicks.
The wr's are good cameras. always have been.Chrissinkpen.
Yes, I think they are lousy... And yes, I have tried other brands.
The great majority of the kind of photography I like to do most, is done with Canon digital compacts and ancient Olympus film compacts. The Canons are an A70 and an S40. Both of them are very old models. The sad thing is, they are still much better built and produce better images than any Pentax compact available NOW!. That is a disgrace for Pentax.
The RS-1000 is typical of Pentax thought process. It can do lots of clever things. It has an ingenious face detection system that delays the shutter until the face is smiling. It can't produce a decent image above 400 ISO, but can recognise teeth!. It also has the vital feature of being able to have bits of vinyl crap stuck on the front. You can even print your own. Perhaps they hope you can print VIVITAR on one of the skins and stick that on. It would be more in keeping with the quality of this camera.
The I-10 is smarter still. It's face recognition system not only works for humans, but pets, too! Yes indeed. The image quality is bad, but it can recognise dear little Tiddles, so the IQ doesn't matter.
Pentax compact cameras are a stain on the Pentax name. The company is rightly respected for It's Dslrs. It has upped I'ts game in that division recently and is now reaping the rewards, shifting tons of K5s K-Rs and K-Xs. A top quality EVIL system to go along with the fine Dslrs and lenses would put Pentax back where it belongs. Seen as a quality maufacturer.
Pentax compacts are low end. Better leave that market to Vivitar, Kodak, Bush and Goodmans. Argos catalogue crap for the masses. Pentax should not make any camera that costs under £300. I want high quality photographic tools from Pentax. Products that continue It's heritage and reputation as a producer of the finest optical instruments... Not stupid little plastic point and shoot dross, full of monkey tennis gimmicks.
I get what you are saying about point and shoots and almost agree with you, but for different reasons.
I believe cell phones will kill all compact camera sales below the $350.00 price point.
I never replaced my g5 due to the fact that my hd camcorders take decent stills as does my iphone, for snap shooting, and my dslrs are usually handy as well..
But if I had to buy a camera or a cell phone with camera, there is little reason to consider a cheap p&s, much less carry one around. I bought my daughter a decent little samsung p&s for christmas one year. She used it on a trip to vegas and after she got a new cell phone we've never seen that camera being used since. Even my little boy has an old cell phone with no cell plan for shooting videos.... (tip: even with no cell plan a deactivated cell phone can still call 911 in North America and most can be tracked in an emergency)
Evil would be a mistake for Pentax. First, like the d-slrs, Pentax would be buying the sensor, which means others out there will have cameras equally capable... then there would be a new line of lenses, Pentax still gets bit at the sales counters when store clerks and canikonians proclaim the lens selection is too limited for Pentax.
Pentax would be better served offering the sensor from the kr with live hdmi out, avchd or h264 video compression, and pelicile mirror for live af even during video shooting in a kx sized (or smaller) body at a price point to keep it competitive with evils, and rely on the k lenses to boost sales. another evil in the marketplace will just result in longer waits for d-slr bodies and lenses for existing Pentax shooters.
Comment by Don posted on Please Pentax, Pleeease! at 01/01/2011 - 17:52
