All Forum Comments
Comment by JohnX posted on Optech strap problem at 21/05/2013 - 13:04
So, I don't use Flickr but like the sound of the 1Tb of on-line storage.
If I set up an account, does anyone yet know if I can just use the storage, or must I also display/share anything I upload?
If I set up an account, does anyone yet know if I can just use the storage, or must I also display/share anything I upload?
Comment by JohnX posted on Great news for Flickr users!.. at 21/05/2013 - 12:17
Was there a copy of PDCU with the K-r?
Did you load it?
If so, do you know what version you loaded?
Did you load it?
If so, do you know what version you loaded?
Comment by JohnX posted on PDCU4 - MAC OS 10.7 lion at 20/05/2013 - 17:14
As Michael says, it's in the operating manual. Pages 69-72 and 161-175.
You have to raise the flash manually for it to operate; button on the left of the pentaprism (as you're looking though it).
Don't raise it - no flash. Raise it - flash if required.
You have to raise the flash manually for it to operate; button on the left of the pentaprism (as you're looking though it).
Don't raise it - no flash. Raise it - flash if required.
Comment by JohnX posted on Force flash K-5iis at 19/05/2013 - 07:37
How about a kit lens off ebay?
Comment by JohnX posted on WTB: Non-working KAF mount lens/mount only at 18/05/2013 - 10:48
Interesting. How does this compare with custom setting colours in-camera, and/or in LR?
Comment by JohnX posted on K-5II camera profile at 17/05/2013 - 16:55
ferret1981 wrote:
Thanks for coming back on this. Always an issue - we all tend to talk abouit negatives and forget the positives. The 150-135 had a poor rep for SDM failures, but this appears to have been associated more with early versions, especially those in the 900xxxx serial number range. JohnX wrote:
Out of interest, you refer to the 50-135 as a 'poor af performer'. I presume you are referring only to speed? Accuracy has always been spot-on regardless of body.
Sorry I am generalising, from reading here and on the other various forums I actually mean everything like the failure rates of sdm, speed and accuracy of the af, but not optical quality I have read this is outstanding. This post and peoples clarity around the different aspects of the AF on the 50 - 135 has really helped me a lot in making my decision.Out of interest, you refer to the 50-135 as a 'poor af performer'. I presume you are referring only to speed? Accuracy has always been spot-on regardless of body.
Later versions don't seem to have attracted the same bad press, but it seems that the replacement motors are much better and have improved af speed performance, so I'm thinking that a new 50-135 will not only be less likely to fail but more likely to be a better over-all performer.
Just for the record, my 50-135 is in the 911xxxx range and performs well (but is no af speed demon).
Many early failures were reported with little used lenses, especially if they had been left unused for a while.
It's my personal theory that the SDM issue with earlier versions of this lens stem from the fact that the af mechanism is a bit 'tight' (for sake of a better description) and put stress on the original SDM motor, more so than other lens with 'lighter' af mechanisms. Unused lens tended to stiffen up so that the SDM motor was even more stressed, with eventual failure.
I have a simple regime of running all my SDM lenses for a few moments each week just to keep the af mech 'loose', and so far no problems.
Comment by JohnX posted on Lens or Body the cause of good/bad autofucus at 16/05/2013 - 14:25
ferret1981 wrote:
If we are talking about a lens that has had been reported as a poor af performer in the past like the 50 - 135, is it fair to say that the focus reliability is upgraded to fair/good with the k5ii?
My 50-135 is quicker to focus on my K5II compared to my K20D, but still slow compared to other lenses. davidstorm wrote:
I think Gary (Cabstar) and MikeP have hit the nail on the head. The K-5II variants are much more accurate in the focussing dept. than the K-5 Mk1 and also lock on more reliably. This is not just a minor difference - it transforms the AF performance, especially in tricky conditions. All of my AF lenses lock on accurately and reliably with the K-5IIs, even the ones that tend to hunt a bit on the K-5 (Sigma 105 macro and Pentax 55-300).
Regards
David
Thanks, I think this is the answer I was looking for. With an identical lens the k5ii improves the accuracy of focus then? but not necessarily the speed it does this in?I think Gary (Cabstar) and MikeP have hit the nail on the head. The K-5II variants are much more accurate in the focussing dept. than the K-5 Mk1 and also lock on more reliably. This is not just a minor difference - it transforms the AF performance, especially in tricky conditions. All of my AF lenses lock on accurately and reliably with the K-5IIs, even the ones that tend to hunt a bit on the K-5 (Sigma 105 macro and Pentax 55-300).
Regards
David
If we are talking about a lens that has had been reported as a poor af performer in the past like the 50 - 135, is it fair to say that the focus reliability is upgraded to fair/good with the k5ii?
Out of interest, you refer to the 50-135 as a 'poor af performer'. I presume you are referring only to speed? Accuracy has always been spot-on regardless of body.
Comment by JohnX posted on Lens or Body the cause of good/bad autofucus at 16/05/2013 - 08:23
Benvenuto!!
Some great stuff on your 500px page.
Some great stuff on your 500px page.
Comment by JohnX posted on Hello all from Italy! at 13/05/2013 - 22:36
Which one are you referring to?