All Forum Comments
Comment by K10D posted on Kodak 35mm ff sensor.... at 07/11/2010 - 04:10
Aye lad, appen they'd be sem, D-LI190
Regards
Regards
Comment by K10D posted on Third Party Batteries for K5 at 07/11/2010 - 03:53
I like the contrast of colour in this. Is it sharpened? It looks a tad too crisp.
Best regards
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on CLUSTER FIG at 06/11/2010 - 12:46
Don't have one but the shops over here are full of them and I've had plenty of demo's. With the right source material and the "expensive" active spectacles, it is a wonderful experience.
I didn't buy one, I bought another large Samsung LED screen. My feelings are that it won't commercially take off. If I wait a couple of years and am proven wrong, then material is more and prices less. $200 here for a second set of glasses!
Best regards
I didn't buy one, I bought another large Samsung LED screen. My feelings are that it won't commercially take off. If I wait a couple of years and am proven wrong, then material is more and prices less. $200 here for a second set of glasses!
Best regards
I'm late in on this set Andrew.
Well fettled. Composition, processing and titles, all put together to your usual impeccable, professional standard.
Best regards
Well fettled. Composition, processing and titles, all put together to your usual impeccable, professional standard.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Nantlle Slate Quarry No.1: The Cutting Shed at 06/11/2010 - 12:38
Anvh wrote:
With digital lenses i meant lenses designed for digital camera's just incase you missed it
No problem Stefan, the term needs dropping as far as Pentax is concerned as there's no chance of putting the wrong lens on a Pentax DSLR.K10D wrote:
I like the term digital lens.
You know how good I'm with words I like the term digital lens.
With digital lenses i meant lenses designed for digital camera's just incase you missed it
K10D wrote:
The designer of the 31mm Ltd may never have realised that it didn't need to be sharp at the edges? Since it's mostly shot through the sweet spot nowadays.
Well the lens was always called magical.The designer of the 31mm Ltd may never have realised that it didn't need to be sharp at the edges? Since it's mostly shot through the sweet spot nowadays.
NaimKhan wrote:
My other reasoning is that since the lens is so popular, it wouldn't be too difficult selling it.
That's a fair point but you will still make some losses... just test the focal length, if that works out for you i'm sure the FA 31mm would be a good lens.My other reasoning is that since the lens is so popular, it wouldn't be too difficult selling it.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on FA 31mm Limited at 06/11/2010 - 12:26
Smeggypants wrote:
All I have to say is the K-r and K-5 have signalled a big leap in product quality from Pentax. I can see it doing them nothing but good.
Maybe the term performance is more suited? Where are the quality improvements on a K5 over the K7 or K20?All I have to say is the K-r and K-5 have signalled a big leap in product quality from Pentax. I can see it doing them nothing but good.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Pentax Aim To Quadruple Sales at 06/11/2010 - 06:57
Anvh wrote:
To calculate the FOV would be another matter though but since you also don't give those numbers but only AOV i think you've used the wrong abbreviation
Also the OP said that that was the focal length that was needed so all we can say is if the lens is good or not.
And since the OP used all digital lenses and zoom lenses that cover that focal length i'm sure the OP knows what he/she talking about.
FL are 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 50mm, 70-200mm and a 1.7TC.K10D wrote:
The focal length will be whatever is needed to get the desired FOV on any given body.
Focal length is fine in discussion but isn't it what you see through the viewfinder that matters?
Well we know it's going to be used on an APS-C digital body so we know how what the AOV would be for the lens.The focal length will be whatever is needed to get the desired FOV on any given body.
Focal length is fine in discussion but isn't it what you see through the viewfinder that matters?
To calculate the FOV would be another matter though but since you also don't give those numbers but only AOV i think you've used the wrong abbreviation
Also the OP said that that was the focal length that was needed so all we can say is if the lens is good or not.
And since the OP used all digital lenses and zoom lenses that cover that focal length i'm sure the OP knows what he/she talking about.
I like the term digital lens. The four above must then be digital and analogue.
The designer of the 31mm Ltd may never have realised that it didn't need to be sharp at the edges? Since it's mostly shot through the sweet spot nowadays.
Buy the lens from Adorama, if you don't like it, it will sell here.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on FA 31mm Limited at 06/11/2010 - 06:45
WIFE
Washing, Ironing, Fotography Etcetera
Regards
Washing, Ironing, Fotography Etcetera
Regards
Comment by K10D posted on K5 Price at Mifsuds at 05/11/2010 - 10:21
May be me, but since I've been buying lenses for a body, I aim at 180 degrees FOV to 8 degrees FOV within limitations.
An example being my last system. I bought four lenses ranging from 114 degrees FOV to 12' FOV. So two more lenses get me to 180 degrees (FE) and 8 degrees (long tele) FOV respectively.
The focal length will be whatever is needed to get the desired FOV on any given body.
Focal length is fine in discussion but isn't it what you see through the viewfinder that matters?
Best regards
An example being my last system. I bought four lenses ranging from 114 degrees FOV to 12' FOV. So two more lenses get me to 180 degrees (FE) and 8 degrees (long tele) FOV respectively.
The focal length will be whatever is needed to get the desired FOV on any given body.
Focal length is fine in discussion but isn't it what you see through the viewfinder that matters?
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on FA 31mm Limited at 05/11/2010 - 02:08
Probably a no brainer.
I think for the near future it's safer to praise the better late than never performance of the K-5 than start thinking about a FF Pentax.
Only speaking for myself, if they do produce a FF in the future, I'd probably have to give it a miss as by then, I'd be fully covered with alternate FF glass.
Unfortunately, Pentaxians have a similar life span to other brand users and luckily for the others, they have a choice already. (though not with MF).
Best regards