All Forum Comments
Comment by JAK posted on Lens calibration - Focus Tune software at 28/04/2013 - 22:49
Russ wrote:
is it worth changing the DA 18-55 for the DA 18-55 WR?
The mark II version is optically the same with and without WR. Do you need it for the WR?is it worth changing the DA 18-55 for the DA 18-55 WR?
John K
Comment by JAK posted on Short zoom to replace kit lens at 28/04/2013 - 22:45
Mannesty wrote:
No, but some Canon and Nikon cameras output their adjustment settings, Pentax doesn't, which means you can only use the shot by shot comparison analysis method.
It does sound like a lot of work. Well I won't be trying it but don't let me stop anyone who wants to.No, but some Canon and Nikon cameras output their adjustment settings, Pentax doesn't, which means you can only use the shot by shot comparison analysis method.
You'd still need to check the results by the basic newspaper/cornflake packet or similar method to make sure the software has done its job, so why not do that in the first place?!
John K
Comment by JAK posted on Lens calibration - Focus Tune software at 28/04/2013 - 22:37
Those wall photos look roughly on par to the distortions portrayed in the photozone review:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/405-pentax_1650_28?start=1
So nothing obviously wrong with it. Might be worth checking the autofocus alignment in case you can make it even better with a slight tweak, but nothing to suggest it needs it.
John K
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/405-pentax_1650_28?start=1
So nothing obviously wrong with it. Might be worth checking the autofocus alignment in case you can make it even better with a slight tweak, but nothing to suggest it needs it.
John K
Comment by JAK posted on Whats wrong with this lens? at 28/04/2013 - 21:28
Renster wrote:
Yes, I should have spotted the earlier post. Thought I had read all the earlier posts but had missed that!JAK wrote:
John K
Hi John, it's a DA* 16-50Renster wrote:
Well it's no secret. I paid £325 for it. I gather from this comment you think that it's maybe performing below par?
Depends what it is. The shots look fine but if you paid £325 for a basic Pentax 18-55mm zoom it might be a little steep. On the other had if it was £3.25 it would be a bargain. What actually is it?Well it's no secret. I paid £325 for it. I gather from this comment you think that it's maybe performing below par?
John K
If there is a problem with that lens, getting it repaired would certainly be cost effective given what they are worth. However, it might well be just fine and you do have a bargain. Those web sized images could hide a multitude of issues but nothing stands out. Curious you need to ask.
I guess it is possible the lens may have had an issue that's been repaired previously, but the owner wasn't happy with it, who knows??
John K
Comment by JAK posted on Whats wrong with this lens? at 28/04/2013 - 18:46
Renster wrote:
Well it's no secret. I paid £325 for it. I gather from this comment you think that it's maybe performing below par?
Depends what it is. The shots look fine but if you paid £325 for a basic Pentax 18-55mm zoom it might be a little steep. On the other had if it was £3.25 it would be a bargain. What actually is it?Well it's no secret. I paid £325 for it. I gather from this comment you think that it's maybe performing below par?
John K
Comment by JAK posted on Whats wrong with this lens? at 28/04/2013 - 18:10
McBrian wrote:
Not camera specific as far as I can see.
If you read half a book do you then know the true ending :
Some books aren't worth the effort.Not camera specific as far as I can see.
If you read half a book do you then know the true ending :
John K
Comment by JAK posted on Lens calibration - Focus Tune software at 28/04/2013 - 10:12
I focussed on the 'H' in 'However'. In pic 1 that clearly is out of focus, in pic 2 it looks good to me. I normally focus and recompose but in those kept the 'H' in the centre.
It's also more of a real test because I am using the camera in the way I normally do.
Still odd that the focus is spot on on the K-m with that lens.
John K
Algernon wrote:
The actual focus point might not coincide exactly with the red crosss
So it's possible that you are focusing on the line above or the line
below.
It's better to focus on something parallel to the back of the camera
as per the lens align jig or even a vertical box.
What red cross? My K-5 has a red square. Anyhow, why focus on something parallel to the sensor when you are trying to determine the focus point. The whole idea is to have something at about 45 degrees to the sensor to ascertain the actual focus point. If it was parallel you'd have nothing to know if it was better elsewhere.The actual focus point might not coincide exactly with the red crosss
So it's possible that you are focusing on the line above or the line
below.
It's better to focus on something parallel to the back of the camera
as per the lens align jig or even a vertical box.
It's also more of a real test because I am using the camera in the way I normally do.
Still odd that the focus is spot on on the K-m with that lens.
John K
Comment by JAK posted on Lens calibration - Focus Tune software at 28/04/2013 - 10:10
Is the software camera specific?
If it is it might show the correct number to dial in, if it isn't then it probably won't. Some cameras have different gaps and a -20 to + 20 range.
John K
Edit: Yes I did watch a few minutes of it but got bored, it seemed so much effort for something so simple.
If it is it might show the correct number to dial in, if it isn't then it probably won't. Some cameras have different gaps and a -20 to + 20 range.
John K
Edit: Yes I did watch a few minutes of it but got bored, it seemed so much effort for something so simple.
Comment by JAK posted on Lens calibration - Focus Tune software at 27/04/2013 - 20:47
Do you need a fake passport to visit Blyth beach now?
Comment by JAK posted on Blyth Beach at 27/04/2013 - 20:09
You also say 'it didn't seem to make much difference'. That's all it is, a fine adjustment!
John K