Could we ask those who do not enter what might be done differently to encourage them to do so; or is there just a lack of interest or lack of time?

I'm sure if JohnR offered a K-5 as a prize each time there would be a huge rush to enter But really, what else might encourage others to enter?

John

I wonder why? Perhaps if it was new at the time and the current way was working there was no need to change. I'm happy either way but feel some would find using the site facilities much easier.

Re johnha's suggestion above that maybe a monthly competition with each member limited to two/three shots)? Perhaps there is scope for allowing multiple entries on occasion if not regularly. A theme could be set which requires a series of several photos that together tell a story, for instance.

John

Agreed about Puma's Grunge thread. Something like that could be the basis for some of the subjects. A short how to and then have a go.

Is there any reason why the gallery cannot host the fortnightly entries as well as the weekly? There's already a link, "Add a competition" so I cannot see it would require any extra work for anyone save updating the already misleading rules.

My suggestion would be to continue to run competitions starting a fortnight apart, but allow four weeks for entries. One would be subject based as per now, and the other a technique comp. Each would start two weeks apart but run for four weeks so there would always be two of these running concurrently. This would allow more time for taking shots or doing PP so may help in attracting more entries.

With that tree comp for instance, if the weather hadn't been right last Monday, I wouldn't have found any other day recently where the lighting was right to take something worthwhile. It could have been I had other commitments that day and couldn't have made use of the opportunity that day so I wouldn't have had an entry either.

Another suggestion is to operate the rule as it is currently actually written in that photos taken in the previous fortnight are also eligible. I've had to go and do retakes already where I had a suitable photo taken a couple of days before the comp was announced but often the retakes are not as good as the originals, eg subject matter has disappeared, flowers have faded, got waterlogged or the light is just wrong.

John

Many thanks Barrie and well done to the other podium finishers! Some super entries if limited in number. Thought a subject like this would attract more entries but the weather hasn't been good again and not every photo is worthy of entering into a competition, given the limited time period to take them. It's a challenge to rise up to but not everyone has the time to do it.

Curious to know how my other potential entry would have faired!

John

Oh, perhaps I was not clear? I wasn't knocking the lens, my issue was choosing which image to use (for the fortnightly comp.) as I was pleased with both!

Why sell it David if you think you might still want it? Probably cost more to replace it later and one you know is better than a new unknown copy.

It is underrated, but overshadowed by the 55-300.

One issue when deciding to take it with me for a lightweight outing is that the DA-L 18-55 plus DA-L 50-200 weigh much the same (combined) as the Pentax 18-250. I think the 50-200 balances better but it is nice to have the combined range in an all in one lens. It's always decisions decisions!

John

I used my copy for the first time in ages yesterday along with my K-m. I had a purpose in mind for the trip and wanted a lightweight kit. The kit lens and DA-L 50-200 were ideal for the purpose. The 50-200 is roughly the same size and weight as the DA-L 18-55.

The purpose of the trip may become a little more obvious seeing the image below, but here it is. (I chose an alternative image for that purpose but it was a tricky call to choose.)




Still wondering if I made the right call!

John

Shady Path




One of several of my contenders for this!

Taken with a K-m with kit lens.

Camera Model: PENTAX K-m
Lens: smc PENTAX-DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL II
Image Date: 2012-06-04 12:16:17 +0100
Focal Length: 55.0mm (35mm equivalent: 82mm)
Aperture: f/9.0
Exposure Time: 0.017 s (1/60)
ISO equiv: 200
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No (enforced)

The contender I didn't use is here: link
Did I make the right choice?

John

Thanks for the video and inspiration to give it a go.

Here's my first effort:




John

We managed for years before shake reduction was invented, and using Kodachrome 25!

The talk is of a camera in the vain of a 1970's ME/MX. It can't have everything included. It's already been said that the shake reduction adds to the bulk. For this retro model it would be superflous.

John

Do you want to use it on film and the K10D ?

I'm not sure which Vivitar 28 you've got. I had several and were brand new. Both were pin sharp, sharper than the Pentax 28 but unfortunately both fell to pieces after relatively little use and had to get refunds on them! They both became unglued at the mount.

I wouldn't like to recommend a particular lens other than suggest looking at the Pentax 12-24, or Sigmas 8-16 or 10-20 or a Pentax prime within that range.

John