John,

I have to concede that if you can guarantee perfect exposure every time, then RAW loses much of its advantage. However, I'm just not so accomplished!

G

Shooting RAW does nothing for sharpness.

The greatest advantage of shooting RAW, for me, is that it allows me to play with exposure after the event. With JPEG, what you see is all you've got.

Galoot makes the point that he would have exposed for the highlights in Pete's fourth picture. Shooting RAW, he can make that choice at the computer. Shooting JPEG, he'd have to find another sunny morning and re-shoot.

Hmm. I suspect that those professionals who allegedly shoot JPEG are somewhat computer-phobic. There is no GOOD reason to shoot JPEG, and thereby restrict your options, though a lack of storage capacity may sometimes force you to do so.

G

PS: I prefer the fourth picture, though I also like the texture of the post on number 3.

Takuma Kajiwara was a photographer, lens designer, and relation of the founder of Ashai Optical.

G

There were no bad Pentax lenses in these focal lengths, and they are all pretty rare, so my advice is to buy what you can find. If you hold out for one particular lens, you may never find it.

I own the M 400 1:5.6, and I used to own the K 300 1:4. I've no complaints about either, but my present 300mm lens, the F* 300 1:4.5 is quite superb. The M 300 is actually a starred lens (M*), and is extremely good, with a price to match.

If cost is a major consideration, then the K 300 or M (or A) 400 would be your best options.

Otherwise, I would advise trying to find the F* 300 1:4.5 which is rather cheaper, and easier to find, than the FA* 400. These latter lenses will be much more convenient to use on your camera, especially for moving subjects.

The F* 300 1:4.5 can be used to track birds in flight, which is impossible to do with MF lenses, unless you pre-focus and wait for the bird to hit the focus position. In practice, they tend to fly off in a different direction.

Edit: I've just noticed you are talking about sports. You will find it much easier to use an AF lens. These long lenses are very difficult to focus manually and quickly.

G

In that case, you would be better off with an A series lens.

G

Very nice, Tim.

The fact that the K10D is better in many practical ways, doesn't mean that the *ist series of DSLRs were bad. They are still very capable machines (in the right hands).

G

Pentax at Slough will give it a service for fifty quid or so. The Americans call this a CLA - clean, lubricate and adjust.

They will then guarantee it for, I think, six months.

Obviously if they find a serious fault, the charge may be higher, but it doesn't sound as though anything is too seriously wrong, except for the brand of lenses being used!

G

Will,

Except for the fact that the camera was bought by Colin, I take your points.

And Colin's, too.

Obviously the camera should be checked out by the dealer, in case it does have a fault. But if there is nothing wrong with it, I am sure Colin will be able to get better results in due course, with some practice and experimentation.

And I certainly agree that a lot of menu-diving should not be necessary, and would be very tedious.

G

Will,

I don't think you can really argue with the contention that if the OP is not going to use the facilities, there was no point in paying for them.

And a little knowledge on the photographer's part is going to yield dividends, even in AUTO mode. Like including less sky in the frame in order to brighten the foreground, or alternatively using the AE adjustment to compensate.

My point is that if he wants to improve his results, there is only one way to do it, and that is to acquire a little photographic knowledge.

The impression the OP gave was that he doesn't want to have any part in the photographic process apart from pointing the camera and pressing the shutter. Frankly, that attitude is never going to yield good results, and I do find it a little bit irritating when people think that everything in life can be bought; and that there is no need for personal effort.

Perhaps I am being unfair to the OP, but that is how he came across to me.

Perhaps this attitiude is partly the fault of advertising that suggests great results can be achieved just by buying the right equipment. Sadly, that is not the case.

G

Well, but the manufacturer doesn't call it a "point and shoot". Pentax say it is "packed with advanced features. The flagship of the Optio digital camera line, the high-end PENTAX Optio A20, offers the pinnacle of PENTAX compact digital photography in an ultra-compact aluminum alloy body". It also has "a versatile manual shooting mode".

In other words, it may be a compact camera, but it's not a point and shoot within the normal meaning of that somewhat dismissive term.

All those bells and whistles are there for a purpose, and if the owner doesn't want to bother with them, he should have bought a different camera. A real point and shoot, with no user-adjustable facilities.


G