All Forum Comments
Looking through the instruction book further it seems that particular model is not able to use some extension tubes and other oddments that do not work with the A setting, so that particular body is crippled to some extent to encourage people to get the ZX-50. If the lens isn't an 'A' one it will not work; I never knew that! However a K-5 or K-3 would be fine with most lenses but if you want to double check show a list for an opinion.
Comment by JAK posted on Looking to buy another DSLR at 10/12/2013 - 22:08
aadixon wrote:
I think this is just a Pentax problem? My friend has a Nikon DSLR, and she can use pretty much any lens, new or old.
I find it hard to believe that you cannot use an old manual lens when the mode dial is set to M. Have you tried that? That does work with the digitals (and meters by pressing the green button.) If you leave your ZX-30 on Av and the aperture on something other than A it doesn't know what aperture is set so it isn't able to communicate with the lens and perceives an error.JAK wrote:
Ok, I understand the newer lenses can be used on older cameras (like my PZ-10), but an older lens WILL NOT let my camera shoot. My ZX-30 has to have a lens with the a ring communication stuff....If I buy a K3 are there any similar problems like this? Not saying this exact thing will happen. I just need to know if I should get a $500 lens, or if my "a ring" lens will work no problem....I wish I just had a K3 to try this out on.aadixon wrote:
(below)This is what it flashes with the older lenses on it OR if I take the lens with the "A ring" off of "A", and put it on another aperture setting (won't shoot with this blinking)
You need to put the dial on M (manual.) When the aperture isn't on A, the lens in effect becomes a non auto lens like the M series that has no electronic communication (allows backwards compatibility with older lenses, and allows newer lenses to be used on older bodies.) Hope that helps!(below)This is what it flashes with the older lenses on it OR if I take the lens with the "A ring" off of "A", and put it on another aperture setting (won't shoot with this blinking)
I think this is just a Pentax problem? My friend has a Nikon DSLR, and she can use pretty much any lens, new or old.
Comment by JAK posted on Looking to buy another DSLR at 10/12/2013 - 21:53
aadixon wrote:
SO! will all of the "new" lenses that fit my ZX-30 work without a problem on a K3?
Generally yes. Exceptions are lenses that were designed to work on Ricoh film cameras (from the 70's/80's) that look like they have a K mount but have an extra pin that tends to get stuck in one of the mount recesses and can be virtually impossible to remove. This is known as the K/R mount.SO! will all of the "new" lenses that fit my ZX-30 work without a problem on a K3?
Otherwise any old Pentax lens is fine, even M42 screw ones with an adapter along with hundreds of third party ones from the likes of Tamron, Sigma, Chinon... (I could go on all day!) Just avoid the K/R ones unless the offending pin has been disabled. Ironic given that Ricoh now own Pentax, how times change; can't see them reintroducing that pin though!
Comment by JAK posted on Looking to buy another DSLR at 10/12/2013 - 21:41
aadixon wrote:
(below)This is what it flashes with the older lenses on it OR if I take the lens with the "A ring" off of "A", and put it on another aperture setting (won't shoot with this blinking)
You need to put the dial on M (manual.) When the aperture isn't on A, the lens in effect becomes a non auto lens like the M series that has no electronic communication (allows backwards compatibility with older lenses, and allows newer lenses to be used on older bodies.) Hope that helps!(below)This is what it flashes with the older lenses on it OR if I take the lens with the "A ring" off of "A", and put it on another aperture setting (won't shoot with this blinking)
Comment by JAK posted on Looking to buy another DSLR at 10/12/2013 - 21:25
Your ZX-30 will be able to use manual metering (set M on the dial.) If you are missing the instruction book it can be obtained from this site:
http://www.pentax-manuals.com/manuals/af/afmanuals.htm
Download the MZ-30 manual and look and page 51 (same camera, different name.)
The K5 and K3 are also able to use manual lenses. If the lenses have the 'A' setting all you would need to do is focus them yourself in any camera mode. The older fully manual ones would need to be metered in M or use them fully open in Av (just needs a setting changing in the menu to use the aperture ring.)
The K-3 is a very fine camera which has superseded the K-5 series. As you say it is better at most things though the jury is out as with regards to very high ISO's (6400 upwards) where the images seem slightly more noisy (nothing really to worry about.) It seems daft not to go the the K-3 unless your only consideration is taking photos at 6400 and above as below ISO 3200 where most photos are taken the K-3 wins hands down.
http://www.pentax-manuals.com/manuals/af/afmanuals.htm
Download the MZ-30 manual and look and page 51 (same camera, different name.)
The K5 and K3 are also able to use manual lenses. If the lenses have the 'A' setting all you would need to do is focus them yourself in any camera mode. The older fully manual ones would need to be metered in M or use them fully open in Av (just needs a setting changing in the menu to use the aperture ring.)
The K-3 is a very fine camera which has superseded the K-5 series. As you say it is better at most things though the jury is out as with regards to very high ISO's (6400 upwards) where the images seem slightly more noisy (nothing really to worry about.) It seems daft not to go the the K-3 unless your only consideration is taking photos at 6400 and above as below ISO 3200 where most photos are taken the K-3 wins hands down.
Comment by JAK posted on Looking to buy another DSLR at 10/12/2013 - 18:45
ilovesaabs wrote:
36x24 wasn't considered Full Frame until Oscar Barnack came along and when APS (film) came along in the 1990s the manufacturers boasted that the technology boost more than made up for the size shortfall, until the technology moved to 35mm....
No it goes back much before that. 1959 in fact when Olympus brought out their Pen series of 'half frame' cameras and continued until some 'full frame' models were manufactured by the likes of Rollei which were no larger than the Pen series. APS, as you indicate came much later (1996) and that allowed various size images to exist on the same roll with a code at the edge to aid the printing device to select the correct image size/shape.36x24 wasn't considered Full Frame until Oscar Barnack came along and when APS (film) came along in the 1990s the manufacturers boasted that the technology boost more than made up for the size shortfall, until the technology moved to 35mm....
Comment by JAK posted on Moving to full frame at 09/12/2013 - 15:14
Whether to leave lens correction on or not depends to some extent what you are taking. Architectural shots will highlight distortion so it helps to have it turned on whereas a photo of a forest will not really benefit at all.
Comment by JAK posted on Lens correction at 08/12/2013 - 22:38
davidstorm wrote:
Agreed Smeggy, but as always there's more to this than meets the eye (!).
A lot of the difference is colour noise which is quite easy to deal with. Also, as demonstrated in the images above, you are seeing a more magnified image due to the higher resolution of the K-3. When making prints at the same physical size the actual real world difference is very small and to my eyes is nothing to worry about. I do understand that a lot of users expected to see an improvement in this area over the K-5, but that's not what the K-3 is about and if you are expecting better high ISO performance than a K-5 you will not get it.
If you are expecting a better all round shooting experience, faster operation, better PTTL flash, faster and more accurate AF, more versatility (e.g. twin SD cards amongst a host of other things), quieter / smoother shutter, better viewfinder (marginally), easier and more accurate focussing with MF lenses, better video, better rear LCD, better SR, Configurable anti-moire, higher resolution and more detail, then you will not be disappointed.
Regards
David
I reckon one can add to that by saying the K-3 has a better build quality and more attention to detail in its construction. Things that Pentax let go in the K-5 such as the dodgy horizon indicator and oil on the sensor in early batches don't seem to have surfaced with the K-3 (touch wood!)Agreed Smeggy, but as always there's more to this than meets the eye (!).
A lot of the difference is colour noise which is quite easy to deal with. Also, as demonstrated in the images above, you are seeing a more magnified image due to the higher resolution of the K-3. When making prints at the same physical size the actual real world difference is very small and to my eyes is nothing to worry about. I do understand that a lot of users expected to see an improvement in this area over the K-5, but that's not what the K-3 is about and if you are expecting better high ISO performance than a K-5 you will not get it.
If you are expecting a better all round shooting experience, faster operation, better PTTL flash, faster and more accurate AF, more versatility (e.g. twin SD cards amongst a host of other things), quieter / smoother shutter, better viewfinder (marginally), easier and more accurate focussing with MF lenses, better video, better rear LCD, better SR, Configurable anti-moire, higher resolution and more detail, then you will not be disappointed.
Regards
David
Comment by JAK posted on Moving to full frame at 08/12/2013 - 22:31
I've just added to my previous post!
Comment by JAK posted on Pentax K-3: REDEMPTION at 08/12/2013 - 21:30
I don't recall complaints that film stock showed grain which got more obvious at higher film speeds! But then there weren't settings to control that in the camera and it affected all cameras to the same amount.
I'm sure if noise is a problem on the K-3 Pentax will tweak some of the settings but the issue seems to be overplayed by some who haven't actually made their own comparison test shots where settings can be changed from the default to see the effect. Relying on published default setting test shots from possibly beta software may give a misleading picture, literally.
The K-3 sensor has 50% more pixels, so if one zooms in to 100% one might expect to see 50% more noise, but at the equivalent magnification that should not be obvious i.e. the K-3 can be run at a 14MP jpeg setting where a closer comparison can be made. If those shots show more noise than a K-5 then the K-3 does have a problem.
I'm sure if noise is a problem on the K-3 Pentax will tweak some of the settings but the issue seems to be overplayed by some who haven't actually made their own comparison test shots where settings can be changed from the default to see the effect. Relying on published default setting test shots from possibly beta software may give a misleading picture, literally.
The K-3 sensor has 50% more pixels, so if one zooms in to 100% one might expect to see 50% more noise, but at the equivalent magnification that should not be obvious i.e. the K-3 can be run at a 14MP jpeg setting where a closer comparison can be made. If those shots show more noise than a K-5 then the K-3 does have a problem.
Comment by JAK posted on Pentax K-3: REDEMPTION at 08/12/2013 - 21:23
