All Forum Comments
Comment by K10D posted on Will Pentax (and everyone else too) go Full Frame? at 17/02/2012 - 07:38
I did say a Pentax lens in the OP.
It's odd that a review in ephotozine says different: link
"For a lens covering such an extreme field of view, distortion levels are surprisingly low. At 8mm Imatest recorded 5.62% barrel distortion, which will certainly be noticeable, but this level is lower than many lenses that aren't as wide, which is quite impressive. At 16mm, the level of barrel distortion drops to 0.562%, which is a very low level indeed and should pose few problems, even with straight lines close to the edge of the frame. Thankfully the distortion pattern is uniform throughout the zoom range, which means any distortion should be fairly simple to correct in image editing software afterwards, if absolutely straight lines are critical".
Still a good review and a good lens. I use the 14-24 and it is not perfectly straight when close to a vertical but it's very very good. The f/2.8 also helps.
I generally prefer same brand glass on a camera. Used to have many Sigma lenses years back when buying in the UK. Since going abroad, it's a no brainer. Bespoke glass is cheaper by far.
The tilt and shift would be Nikkor for the D700. My Pentax 28mm shift is stuffed already and only of use on 35mm Pentax bodies.
Best regards
It's odd that a review in ephotozine says different: link
"For a lens covering such an extreme field of view, distortion levels are surprisingly low. At 8mm Imatest recorded 5.62% barrel distortion, which will certainly be noticeable, but this level is lower than many lenses that aren't as wide, which is quite impressive. At 16mm, the level of barrel distortion drops to 0.562%, which is a very low level indeed and should pose few problems, even with straight lines close to the edge of the frame. Thankfully the distortion pattern is uniform throughout the zoom range, which means any distortion should be fairly simple to correct in image editing software afterwards, if absolutely straight lines are critical".
Still a good review and a good lens. I use the 14-24 and it is not perfectly straight when close to a vertical but it's very very good. The f/2.8 also helps.
I generally prefer same brand glass on a camera. Used to have many Sigma lenses years back when buying in the UK. Since going abroad, it's a no brainer. Bespoke glass is cheaper by far.
The tilt and shift would be Nikkor for the D700. My Pentax 28mm shift is stuffed already and only of use on 35mm Pentax bodies.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Will Pentax (and everyone else too) go Full Frame? at 16/02/2012 - 12:07
jules wrote:
Pentax was however First, an ME Super in 1979 I think?
So back to where I began... Again and on pain of Death if I ever sell up on a whim... again...
Your better half is either an angel or very very tolerant. My better half is possibly both as I just mention a camera for Xmas, spring, summer or the weekend and it's a done deal.Rees wrote:
Welcome Back Jules, but what made you venture away in the first place?
You said it yourself when you looked at your hard drive and saw all those glorious Pentax images there!
Like Mike P said the grass looks greener, also a certain amount of peer pressure from long time Nikon Users like myself (Nikon User 25 Yrs)and fellow Landscapers to go FF. (Still hate the term!)Welcome Back Jules, but what made you venture away in the first place?
You said it yourself when you looked at your hard drive and saw all those glorious Pentax images there!
Pentax was however First, an ME Super in 1979 I think?
So back to where I began... Again and on pain of Death if I ever sell up on a whim... again...
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Can I come Home Please??? at 16/02/2012 - 10:55
Pentaxophile wrote:
The 8-16mm would probably be better.
As John said, it means going outside of the brand which I didn't want to do. Also the 8mm end has too much distortion.The 8-16mm would probably be better.
If this type of work continues, I may yet buy a tilt shift.
I would love to try a 645D with an ultra wide rectilinear though.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Will Pentax (and everyone else too) go Full Frame? at 16/02/2012 - 10:51
Dr. Mhuni wrote:
Well the expense does not come into the equation so that just leaves super fast AF, seriously competent flash system, big bright viewfinder, a very large range of lenses to choose from including legacy lenses, metering that is just amazing and as I'm not an invalid yet I carry three cameras on me whilst working as it saves changing lenses. Even when shooting film I was always carrying two LX cameras (one slide and one neg) plus either an MX or ME Super with B&W.Quote:
Not sure about the better pictures though. The IQ from my Pentax's is always excellent.
I hope you are noticing some benefits from your svelt D700, otherwise - as George and Pentaxophile observe - why put up with the expense and bulk?Not sure about the better pictures though. The IQ from my Pentax's is always excellent.
I just needed a hard hat to audition to be one of the village people.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Will Pentax (and everyone else too) go Full Frame? at 16/02/2012 - 10:48
sledger wrote:
Not seeing anything special about those K-01 samples
Itching to see some videos samples...
I think they are just a set taken add hock and not meant to be "display" shots. Not seeing anything special about those K-01 samples
Itching to see some videos samples...
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Images with a K-01 at 16/02/2012 - 09:47
johnriley wrote:
If the 12-24mm isn't wide enough for interior photography (and it is pretty wide) then Photoshop is the obvious answer. Maybe stitching images, maybe correcting distortion.
It's the way the world is, without Photoshop only a percentage of our vision can be realised. Manufacturewrs are even starting to make cameras/lenses that require post processing, which is going a bit far IMHO, but it was bound to happen.
To be truthful John, it was only because I have a 14-24mm on FF/135 that I accepted the job. As long as the lens was horizontally level, the verticals were vertical as it's a rectilinear. The 12mm would give approx FOV of an 18mm which is not wide enough. I see a difference between my 16-50 SDM and the 17-50 Sigma at the wide end and the Pentax is the lens to use due to that 1mm less. My 15mm Pentax would have done the job on a FF/135 but sadly not on my digital kit.If the 12-24mm isn't wide enough for interior photography (and it is pretty wide) then Photoshop is the obvious answer. Maybe stitching images, maybe correcting distortion.
It's the way the world is, without Photoshop only a percentage of our vision can be realised. Manufacturewrs are even starting to make cameras/lenses that require post processing, which is going a bit far IMHO, but it was bound to happen.
I would not consider stitching as there were close to two hundred shots taken and unless it's stitching a landscape etc, I would never consider doing the extra work if there is kit available that captures the whole image it in one shot.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Will Pentax (and everyone else too) go Full Frame? at 16/02/2012 - 09:45
Sounds like you had one of the early D7000's with the oil issue for sure. Yes the D3 is a beast hence I went with a D700.
Thanks for the info as you have really made me happy. I have yet to have an issue with my own kit (famous last words)and I normally end up with the dogs.
As for the monies you've spent, well done that man! Hope you will find peace and contentment with your new kit.
Best regards
Thanks for the info as you have really made me happy. I have yet to have an issue with my own kit (famous last words)and I normally end up with the dogs.
As for the monies you've spent, well done that man! Hope you will find peace and contentment with your new kit.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Can I come Home Please??? at 16/02/2012 - 07:12
Comment by K10D posted on For those that buy a Pentax 560mm at 16/02/2012 - 04:19
Comment by K10D posted on Images with a K-01 at 16/02/2012 - 04:09
Well the expense does not come into the equation
The K5 is indeed a cracking achievement. I wanted a 135 format camera though and rather than do without I bought into Nikon. I plan to buy a 400 f/2.8 this year, something I can't get of the shelf for a K7 or K5.
Well I have a friend with much deeper pockets than mine who has a D700. When I had a K20 I was very envious of his low light/high ISO performance but having moved on to a K5 there is much less difference between the two. In fact I would say there's nothing in it and given the size ergonomics and solid feel of the K5 I no longer covet his great big hunk of plastic.
(the Canon 5DMkII feels even worse to me)
Where the D700 wins is the fact he has a much greater selection of fast glass to stick on the front. Pretty much all of Pentax's fast glass is at least a decade or more old in design terms. Or discontinued!
My K7 and K10 are doing very well at the moment, the K7 has the 21mm glued to it and the K10 is my new macro camera.
My comments as before and as I tell people on a shoot, best IQ from Pentax, very fast work with Nikon.
I'm currently using a lot of fill flash with the Nikons because it's so easy and effortless. It just seems to work every time. I even use the SB400 on the D7000 with the 70-200mm at silly long distances and the results are well sorted. I cannot seem to be able to do that with my K7 and AF360.
Remember that Joe public has no clue or issue with IQ, so a JPEG from a Pentax or Nikon is the same thing to him. We, on the other hand do see the subtle differences and hence discuss these matters calmly and politely......
Best regards