All Forum Comments
Very poor performance with fast moving objects when shooting at ISO800 or above mainly, I live in Lancashire, it's wet, dark and gloomy here most of the time!
Comment by galeforce1 posted on K5, was it worth the wait? at 29/09/2010 - 15:51
I will definitely be buying one once the price drops a bit. I had been wanting to upgrade from my now elderly K100D Super for a long time, but due to adverse comments about the K-7's higher ISO performance I decided to hold off. I'm glad I did now, the K-5 will give me pretty much everything I want and with the new prime lens should vastly improve my low light working.
I think for many of us new cameras are not a regular option, so there will likely have been three more models out before I'm ready to change cameras once again. As many members have said before, you can spend all your time waiting for perfection to arrive, but the important thing is to get out there and take pictures and not sit here worrying about what comes next.
I've taken over 45,000 pictures with my old K100D in spite of its limitations, sometimes it's up to the user to learn how to get the best out of whatever camera they're using rather than expecting manufacturers to design all the difficulty out of it for us!
I think for many of us new cameras are not a regular option, so there will likely have been three more models out before I'm ready to change cameras once again. As many members have said before, you can spend all your time waiting for perfection to arrive, but the important thing is to get out there and take pictures and not sit here worrying about what comes next.
I've taken over 45,000 pictures with my old K100D in spite of its limitations, sometimes it's up to the user to learn how to get the best out of whatever camera they're using rather than expecting manufacturers to design all the difficulty out of it for us!
Comment by galeforce1 posted on K5, was it worth the wait? at 29/09/2010 - 14:32
The fault here was entirely the PCSO's, in days gone by a police officer would have approached you discreetly and very quickly sussed out if you were a threat or not just by chatting with you for a few minutes, nowadays some jumped up PCSO approaches you with the words "Section 44, come over here and give us your details", and this immediately escalates the situation.
Lord Carlyle, the anti-terror watchdog, and ACPO have repeatedly told them that Section 44 is a special power that should only be used in exceptional circumstances and when there is a real threat, and not to routinely stop people from going about their lawful business, but the message just doesn't seem to get through.
These people have done more harm to community relations than anyone, and they are now viewed as "Them" rather than us. Their total lack of proper training, common sense, and understanding of the law, coupled with an attitude of "I'm wearing a uniform, therefore I must be right" is damaging the reputation of the police, and removing any trust that we previously had for them.
Lord Carlyle, the anti-terror watchdog, and ACPO have repeatedly told them that Section 44 is a special power that should only be used in exceptional circumstances and when there is a real threat, and not to routinely stop people from going about their lawful business, but the message just doesn't seem to get through.
These people have done more harm to community relations than anyone, and they are now viewed as "Them" rather than us. Their total lack of proper training, common sense, and understanding of the law, coupled with an attitude of "I'm wearing a uniform, therefore I must be right" is damaging the reputation of the police, and removing any trust that we previously had for them.
Comment by galeforce1 posted on Another case of Police Overstepping the mark at 24/02/2010 - 16:12
This is a copy of a letter sent by the Association of Chief Police
Officers to Chief Constables and Commissioners across England and
Wales over the weekend.
Maybe they need to send it to some of the private security firms as well, because they escalate at lot of situations by their aggressive attitudes towards photographers. Do the police take everything they say to them as gospel, and do they ever check these companies out, many of their staff seem like little more than thugs and bullies. Some PCSOs need to learn to approach photographers with something more than a 'Oy Sunshine what do you think you're up to" attitude, which puts people on the defensive right away:
4 December 2009
To: all Chief Constables and Commissioners
Dear Colleague
Section 44 Terrorism Act and Photography
Adverse media coverage of the police service use of Section 44 powers, when dealing with issues relating to photography, have recently hit the headlines again and suggests that officers continue to misuse the legislation that is available to them. The evidence also suggests that there is confusion over the recording requirements of 'Stop and Account' and the actual police powers of 'Stop and Search'. The purpose of this letter is to clarify the legislation and guidance in relation to these matters.
Stop and Search
Section 44 gives officers no specific powers in relation to photography and there is no provision in law for the confiscation of equipment or the destruction of images, either digital or on film.
On the rare occasion where an officer suspects that an individual is taking photographs as part of target reconnaissance for terrorist purposes, then they should be treated as a terrorist suspect and dealt with under Section 43 of the Act. This would ensure that the legal power exists to seize equipment and recover images taken. Section 58A Counter Terrorism Act 2008 provides powers to cover instances where photographs are being taken of police officers who are, or who have been, employed at the front line of counter terrorism operations.
These scenarios will be exceptionally rare events and do not cover instances of photography by rail enthusiasts, tourists or the media.
The ACPO/NPIA Practice Advice, published in December 2008, is again included with this letter and specifically covers the issues surrounding photography. The guidance also includes the need for clear briefings on the use of Section 44 and it may be appropriate to include photography issues within those briefings.
Stop and Account
Encounters between police officers and PCSOs and the public range from general conversation through to arrest. Officers need to be absolutely clear that no record needs to be submitted to cover any activity that merely constitutes a conversation.
Only at the point where a member of the public is asked to account for their actions, behaviour, presence in an area or possession of an item, do the provisions of the PACE Act apply and a record for that 'stop and account' need to be submitted. Even at that point, such a discussion does not constitute the use of any police power and should not be recorded under the auspices of the Terrorism Act, for example.
Officers should be reminded that it is not an offence for a member of the public or journalist to take photographs of a public building and use of cameras by the public does not ordinarily permit use of stop and search powers.
Yours sincerely
Andrew Trotter OBE QPM
Chief Constable
Head of ACPO Media Advisory Group
Craig Mackey QPM
Stop and Search
Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Business Area
Officers to Chief Constables and Commissioners across England and
Wales over the weekend.
Maybe they need to send it to some of the private security firms as well, because they escalate at lot of situations by their aggressive attitudes towards photographers. Do the police take everything they say to them as gospel, and do they ever check these companies out, many of their staff seem like little more than thugs and bullies. Some PCSOs need to learn to approach photographers with something more than a 'Oy Sunshine what do you think you're up to" attitude, which puts people on the defensive right away:
4 December 2009
To: all Chief Constables and Commissioners
Dear Colleague
Section 44 Terrorism Act and Photography
Adverse media coverage of the police service use of Section 44 powers, when dealing with issues relating to photography, have recently hit the headlines again and suggests that officers continue to misuse the legislation that is available to them. The evidence also suggests that there is confusion over the recording requirements of 'Stop and Account' and the actual police powers of 'Stop and Search'. The purpose of this letter is to clarify the legislation and guidance in relation to these matters.
Stop and Search
Section 44 gives officers no specific powers in relation to photography and there is no provision in law for the confiscation of equipment or the destruction of images, either digital or on film.
On the rare occasion where an officer suspects that an individual is taking photographs as part of target reconnaissance for terrorist purposes, then they should be treated as a terrorist suspect and dealt with under Section 43 of the Act. This would ensure that the legal power exists to seize equipment and recover images taken. Section 58A Counter Terrorism Act 2008 provides powers to cover instances where photographs are being taken of police officers who are, or who have been, employed at the front line of counter terrorism operations.
These scenarios will be exceptionally rare events and do not cover instances of photography by rail enthusiasts, tourists or the media.
The ACPO/NPIA Practice Advice, published in December 2008, is again included with this letter and specifically covers the issues surrounding photography. The guidance also includes the need for clear briefings on the use of Section 44 and it may be appropriate to include photography issues within those briefings.
Stop and Account
Encounters between police officers and PCSOs and the public range from general conversation through to arrest. Officers need to be absolutely clear that no record needs to be submitted to cover any activity that merely constitutes a conversation.
Only at the point where a member of the public is asked to account for their actions, behaviour, presence in an area or possession of an item, do the provisions of the PACE Act apply and a record for that 'stop and account' need to be submitted. Even at that point, such a discussion does not constitute the use of any police power and should not be recorded under the auspices of the Terrorism Act, for example.
Officers should be reminded that it is not an offence for a member of the public or journalist to take photographs of a public building and use of cameras by the public does not ordinarily permit use of stop and search powers.
Yours sincerely
Andrew Trotter OBE QPM
Chief Constable
Head of ACPO Media Advisory Group
Craig Mackey QPM
Stop and Search
Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Business Area
Comment by galeforce1 posted on Another Arrest at 17/12/2009 - 13:15
Some types of rechargables develop 'memory' after a while, which greatly reduces their capacity so they don't charge fully, others may suffer a bit of a voltage drop and give incorrect readings on the meter (and with normal rechargables they start to lose their charge as soon as you take them off the charger). Like lidy, I changed to Eneloops some time back and have never had a problem since then (these will hold their charge for much longer periods when not in use).
I would never use any other type of battery with my K100 now, and they seem to run for ages without showing any drop on the meter, even though they have a smaller listed capacity (2000ma) than the previous 2900ma types I was using. I had exactly the same problems you describe, but have had none whatsoever in the 12 months since I switched to Eneloops.
I bought a set of four batteries from eBay, and these came with a very nice 'smart' charger, which not only charges the batteries much faster, but also shows the capacity of each individual battery as it is charging, and this makes like much simpler as well.
link
I would never use any other type of battery with my K100 now, and they seem to run for ages without showing any drop on the meter, even though they have a smaller listed capacity (2000ma) than the previous 2900ma types I was using. I had exactly the same problems you describe, but have had none whatsoever in the 12 months since I switched to Eneloops.
I bought a set of four batteries from eBay, and these came with a very nice 'smart' charger, which not only charges the batteries much faster, but also shows the capacity of each individual battery as it is charging, and this makes like much simpler as well.
link
Comment by galeforce1 posted on Pentax K100 Battey Problem at 19/10/2009 - 13:58
