All Forum Comments
Just some short comments: I have owned a FA* 24/2 for some time and I did sell it some time ago. Several rumors state that one of the lens elements might delaminate and thus could cause problems (so be sure to check this). Even if this is not the case, this lens seems to be (one of) the weakest of all FA* versions: http://www.photozone.de/pentax/121-pentax-smc-fa-24mm-f2-al-if-review--lab-test-...
Comment by froeschle posted on WTB: FA* 24mm f2.0 at 21/07/2012 - 00:25
Quote:
The 77mm, for example is a whisker better than the 70mm Limited
It is "faster" but is it really "better"?The 77mm, for example is a whisker better than the 70mm Limited
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/128-pentax-smc-fa-77mm-f18-limited-review--test-r...
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/127-pentax-smc-da-70mm-f24-limited-review--test-r...
Comment by froeschle posted on Pentax K-3 at 06/07/2012 - 16:58
http://web.aanet.com.au/bayling/repair.html
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-24.shtml
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-24.shtml
Comment by froeschle posted on Radioactive Takumar M42 lenses at 22/06/2012 - 09:10
E.g. my 645N, 45-85 FA, 80-160 A, 75 FA, Macros: 120 A, 120 FA are currently not used.
Maybe, I should perform some shots with my lenses on a Pentax-DSLR using the 645-K adapter. Especially the macros should perform very well.
I had several 645D cameras in my hands in the stores in Japan in 2011 and was tempted, but resisted due to the price. Maybe, subconsciously, I hope to acquire a used version for a bargain price sometime.
Both mentioned lenses are imho underrated. See also:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ossy59/5585622326/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ossy59/5585622666/
However, the condition is only described as "average".
Btw, there are also other interesting secondhand items from LCE: Two Q sets, Q toy lens, ...
As far as I know, the 645DII will be located above the 645D, lowering the MSRP of the latter. Would a price tag of about £5000 be more attractive? Would I order one? Probably not. But never say never. So, perhaps, we are really kidding ourselves.
Maybe, I should perform some shots with my lenses on a Pentax-DSLR using the 645-K adapter. Especially the macros should perform very well.
I had several 645D cameras in my hands in the stores in Japan in 2011 and was tempted, but resisted due to the price. Maybe, subconsciously, I hope to acquire a used version for a bargain price sometime.
Both mentioned lenses are imho underrated. See also:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ossy59/5585622326/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ossy59/5585622666/
However, the condition is only described as "average".
Btw, there are also other interesting secondhand items from LCE: Two Q sets, Q toy lens, ...
As far as I know, the 645DII will be located above the 645D, lowering the MSRP of the latter. Would a price tag of about £5000 be more attractive? Would I order one? Probably not. But never say never. So, perhaps, we are really kidding ourselves.
Comment by froeschle posted on How many of us still have 645 equipment? at 21/06/2012 - 12:59
Let us look at it from a different perspective and change the question: Is it possible to obtain indistinguishable pictures from cameras with sensors of different size?
The answer is yes, for details see e.g.: http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/ .
However, there are also situations, where this is not possible. The larger format then opens up possibilities, which cannot be realized with the smaller format.
Furthermore, the larger sensor system does not necessarily have to be bigger, heavier or more expensive - if you really compare equivalent systems.
An example: One result of equivalency is that lenses with aperture set at 2.8 on APS-C can fully be replaced with lenses set to 4 on FF (with other parameters adjusted). So, an APS-C camera with the combination of 16-50/2.8 and 50-135/2.8 may fully (not only regarding DOF) be replaced by a FF camera together with 24-70/4 and 70-200/4. You obtain more possibilities, if you even acquire a faster lens, e.g. a 24-70/2.8. Results with this combination at open aperture cannot be duplicated on APS-C, where no equivalent 16-50/2 is available.
So, it may even make perfectly sense to change to FF even if you are satisfied with the output (quality) of an APS-C-System, as there might be interesting additional options for you: A special lens might not be available for the smaller format (e.g. 28-105/4 on FF); a setup of equivalent lenses could be significantly cheaper on the larger sensor system and even balance the additional cost for the body. The latter becomes more probable, if the price rumors about the A99 and the D600 are correct. This could then even kill "professional" APS-C-DSLRs in the long term.
The answer is yes, for details see e.g.: http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/ .
However, there are also situations, where this is not possible. The larger format then opens up possibilities, which cannot be realized with the smaller format.
Furthermore, the larger sensor system does not necessarily have to be bigger, heavier or more expensive - if you really compare equivalent systems.
An example: One result of equivalency is that lenses with aperture set at 2.8 on APS-C can fully be replaced with lenses set to 4 on FF (with other parameters adjusted). So, an APS-C camera with the combination of 16-50/2.8 and 50-135/2.8 may fully (not only regarding DOF) be replaced by a FF camera together with 24-70/4 and 70-200/4. You obtain more possibilities, if you even acquire a faster lens, e.g. a 24-70/2.8. Results with this combination at open aperture cannot be duplicated on APS-C, where no equivalent 16-50/2 is available.
So, it may even make perfectly sense to change to FF even if you are satisfied with the output (quality) of an APS-C-System, as there might be interesting additional options for you: A special lens might not be available for the smaller format (e.g. 28-105/4 on FF); a setup of equivalent lenses could be significantly cheaper on the larger sensor system and even balance the additional cost for the body. The latter becomes more probable, if the price rumors about the A99 and the D600 are correct. This could then even kill "professional" APS-C-DSLRs in the long term.
Comment by froeschle posted on Pentax Rumoured To Announce the K-3 Full Frame DSLR At Photokina at 21/06/2012 - 11:54
This is barondla's setup: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/185934-new-pentax-red-dot-finder-q-d...
and here is mine: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/185934-new-pentax-red-dot-finder-q-d...#post1990925
and here is mine: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/185934-new-pentax-red-dot-finder-q-d...#post1990925
Comment by froeschle posted on So what can we expect from the Q? at 20/06/2012 - 14:39
Hi, thanks to all which "don't have a problem selling outside the UK". However, I am only interested in the two A* lenses. Regards, froeschle.
Comment by froeschle posted on FS: A & A* Series Collection (28, 50, 85, 100, 135, 200) at 18/06/2012 - 21:31
Has anybody tested MP-C-mount-lenses on the Q here? E.g. ebay 110889433628, 110852732361 or 110852731066? Just curious.
Comment by froeschle posted on Portrait fun with the Q at 18/06/2012 - 21:18
This one disgusting sentence in bold saves me a lot of money ...
Comment by froeschle posted on FS: A & A* Series Collection (28, 50, 85, 100, 135, 200) at 18/06/2012 - 15:56
I'm looking for a Pentax Rear Converter-A 1.4x-L at a reasonable price.
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/teleconverters/A1.4X-L.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ossy59/2701812510/
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/teleconverters/A1.4X-L.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ossy59/2701812510/
Comment by froeschle posted on Wanted: Pentax Rear Converter-A 1.4x-L at 13/06/2012 - 12:02
