lemmy

Status: Member
Join Date: 24th August 2008
Last Login: 27th November 2012 - 14:51
Real Name: David Thorpe
Website: Http:www.dthorpe.net
Occupation:
Interests: Music Photography Theatre Reading

All Forum Comments
Topic / Forum Comment
WTB: DA*200mm f2.8
Posted in Classified Adverts
Just that if it was SRS then you could have given 18 months warranty with it as you get 2 years from a Pentax pro dealer and Chris is happy to transfer it between forum members.Sorry, Mike, looking at my post, it looks a little brusque. I didn't mean it that way, I was just curious why it mattered. Blimey, that's good, isn't it? I've bought lots of my gear from SRS without even knowing that.
WTB: DA*200mm f2.8
Posted in Classified Adverts
Jessups. why? I'd give a copy of the receipt of course. I don't know if you can transfer warranties but I'm sure there'd be a way. Not that I've ever had a lens pack up on me.
WTB: DA*200mm f2.8
Posted in Classified Adverts
Hi Lemmy - So has the buyer of your DA*200 pulled out? Am interested if he has, and you're willing to sell to me, especially if you were to waive the ebay fee? Yes, pulled out. Yes, I'll knock the eBay fee off. It would have been the max of 40, so that'd be 488 but there is the postage of about 12 including insurance. Can we say 500 posted? If you are in London, we could meet up, of course.
WTB: DA*200mm f2.8
Posted in Classified Adverts
Anyone have one they'd like to offload for a reasonable price? Thanks,I have one which was eBayed last week but the buyer hasn't paid. It went for 528. It was bought in July last year so still under warranty and is in completely new condition, no marks anywhere. In other words, if you bought a new one you would be buying nothing different except 6 months more waraanty! Pictures
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
But really why leave any one can stay on and still be part of the site?I'd never thought of that. But yes, I'm used to and comfortable here and there is plenty of stuff that's not Pentax specific. The only thing is, if Pentax come out with some amazing new whatever and I feel the buying urging coming on, my wife will come round to all your houses with a gun :P
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
Leica M which is the only alternative if FF is needed in a small package. The main drawback of course is the high cost.I'd love one of those! I saw one in Jacobs and handled it a bit. I wondered whether they sold many and the guy said, yes they sold them regularly but obviously not in quantity. When my ship comes in, a Leica dealer will be my first port of call. Unfortunately, going by my past performances, when my ship comes in, I will be at the airport.
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
I think once you need a camera bag it becomes largely academic and there are some very compact new bodies out there with ludicrously large lenses on them - surely it defeats the purpose?I half agree. I agree that a small body with a big lens is pointless from the size aspect but the size of my Pentax outfit doesn't concern me. I carry it all in a back pack of a perfectly manageable size. It's the weight. For a carry everywhere, I use an Olympus E-PL3 with the Panasonic X compact zoom on it, tiny enough to go into a large coat pocket or any bag but still good enough for my stock stuff. It's a great luxury to have two cameras for different purposes but needing only one set of lenses. Incidentally, I've just weighed my GH2 with 12mm f2, 20mm f1.7 and 45mm f1.8, my basic working outfit - it comes in at just under 900gms!
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
I always use the analogy if you bought one of Hendrix's old guitars could you play like him I didn't have an ex Hendrix one but I did have a Strat until recently, a lovely black one with rosewood fingerboards which I played at least as well as, if not better than Hendrix. I would go on stage at the O2, plug it in to my Marshall stack,and invoke some howling feedback which I would shape into the National Anthem. Then, with the crowd going wild I'd launch into Johnny B Goode, my second song and already the crowd were on their feet dancing and cheering which would continue into the intro to my third song This song would start with a loud and insistent bleeping noise and a Welsh accented voice announcing a fresh crisis in the Euro zone and.......B****r! Time to get up :( I saw the programme with the photographer whose business had fallen through the floor. He's one of many, I think. Certainly I hear about some of the successful magazine photographers I knew now adding to the congestion in the wedding photography business. I take the point of Pentax producing a compact camera body but the trouble is, if you use the same lenses, you lose the weight and size advantages of M43. The K5 is already compact. It's the lenses that add the weight. I'd liked the idea of the panacakes on a compact body but as Pentaxophile pointed out it just ain't that simple, sadly.
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
iq looks good, sharpness, detail and noise as well despite 4/3, AF seems to be fastAll the attributes you quote are true. The AF is superb, in fact. The difference comes with the dynamic range. With the K5, I was constantly amazed at how I could look at the histogram, see burned out highlights....and pull them back in to show detail. Ditto shadows. The 4/3 has much less leeway and if I can, not sports pix, obviously, I will actually consult the histogram and get as much in bounds a possible. Makes a big difference. With the K5, you can often just shoot and worry about the exposure afterwards. Suddenly, I realise, I am always talking about RAW files, as I never use jpg except for eBay shots. With the GH2, you have a pretty limited range of lenses, especially at the long focus end. And the sheer versatility of the K5 is stunning. Effectively, there are lenses, adapters and equipment for anything you might want to do. Not so the four thirds. I can manage because what I do these days is under my control. But if I were still operating even semi-professionally, the 4/3 would be sadly lacking. A 150mm (300 equiv) f2.8? Pentax have a superb one. Panasonic.....ermmmmm...maybe one day. It is undeniable that in order to take up 4/3 as the basis for a system, up to the present time, you have to compromise on what you do. If I were advising someone younger, I'd say, hang the weight, buy the Pentax. The K5 itself, a little gem in my view, is hardly bigger or heavier than the GH2 anyway. but the laws of physics dictate the lenses are bigger and heavier. Lens design for micro four thirds obviously must have its design constraints too but you can see with the APS-C sensor that the Sony Nex cameras bodies can be tiny but optical laws mean the lenses are big, in my view nullifying the point of the small body. Something I hadn't thought at all of was mentioned by Pentaxophile. Of course! You couldn't just put a Pentax pancake on a Pentax micro 4/3 because you would need an adapter to move the lens out from the camera body to get the focal distance....and it wouldn't be a pancake, more a cupcake. Cabstar, yes looking back at my library with Rex Features and on my website, I had some great clients and got to see and work with some great stars, film, music fashion and all. I was fortunate to be a photographer at a time when the world of the arts and show business was less controlled than now and photographers and their craft were as highly regarded and as valued as the musicians and stars they worked with. Digital photography changed something much more fundamental than just swapping film for pixels. It democratized photography in that more people could more easily master the technique but it also sadly has left anyone who owns an expensive camera thinking they are a good photographer and - even worse - other people agreeing with them. Strange, because no-one would assume that because someone owns a Steinway piano, it makes them a great pianist.
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
but have you considered how much it's going to cost you when Pentax ups the ante with a new, better systemI have, but with the roads as they are and 6 to 7kg of cameras on my back as I fall down potholes and shudder over ripples on my bike, I need to do something soon, else I won't be able to carry any cameras, lightweight or not :cry: Which begs the question would I change my outfit if I did my work at home or in a studio. No, absolutely not, unless it was all in a studio, in which case a 645 would be rather nice...
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
funnily enough, I have come the opposite wayYes, I can see the logic in that. If the weight factor doesn't loom large, it's the next big step up in quality and versatility. I have the 20mm Pancake too and it's become to me what my 35mm f2 was on my Nikon SLRs in my professional days, the lens on which I do everything unless there's a good reason to change it.
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
So long Lemmy, sorry to see such a valuable contributor go.I'm touched, thanks very much. I've had some great conversations here and learnt a lot. The Micro 4/3 forums tend to be less entertaining for me because the cameras, while capable, are more consumer orientated so there is less of the talented amateur, enthusiast and professional input on their forums than on the Pentax User forum.
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
Imagine what kind of reception a Pentax rangefinder type camera, with interchangeable lenses and the kind of IQ you get with a K5 or KR, would have hadA Pentax rangefinder/ EVF hybrid viewfinder that would take the pancake lenses :idea: What a brilliant idea because the lenses already exist so a ready made market worldwide for such a camera. Yes please! Where can I pay my deposit?
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
Please try to make sure this thread doesn't end up the same way as the other farewell threads have...I hoped I had framed my post in such a way that I had made it clear that I had no axe to grind nor was I expressing any resentments, so that any angry replies would be forestalled. I thought my thoughts and reasons might be of interest to a few people. If that's not clear or the post is inappropriate, please feel free to delete it John.
A (Very) Fond Farewell to Pentax
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
This isn't one of those whinging 'why I'm giving up Pentax' posts! However, I am selling my Pentax gear - K5, lenses from 12-44 zoom, 60-250mm, 200 2.8 and many in between. The camera is superb, I have no complaints. Neither do I have about the lenses, each and every one of them a great example of its type. So why am I selling? I bought a Panasonic GH2 as a carry around camera, with a few Olympus and Panasonic lenses. A 12mm f2, 45mm f1.8 17mm f1.7 and others to come as my gear sells. I also supply pix to Alamy, which has pretty stringent IQ requirements. My first 80 images on the GH2 passed QC with no problems. The camera is light, versatile and a joy to use with its large, bright EVF, articulated LCD and ergonomic control layout and alternative touch screen control which I personally adore. No, its out and out image quality doesn't match the K5, nor its image capture speed. But it is light, I can carry a couple of bodies plus lenses in a tiny and light bag compared to my K5 and equivalent lenses. The things I, as an EX Pro, now keeping my hand in with stock images, need to do are done perfectly well by this 4/3 camera. And with the new 16Mp sensor, with good quality up to 1600 ISO. I'd put the quality at about 1.5 stops behind the K5 noise wise. For my purposes, good enough. I'm selling now because I ain't getting younger and the weight of the 4/3 stuff on my back is so much easier when I'm cycling (my main transport) and photographing around London. I can slip the camera and the new, tiny, 28-85mm equivalent X zoom in my shoulder bag so that it is always with me now that I am a lazy old s*d. I had thought of getting a set of pancake lenses for the K5 but in order to get the long focal lengths, the laws of physics dictate they get very big. The main reason I have made my decision now, however, is that I waited for Pentax to produce some radical new stuff. And they did, the Q. But getting images from that past the stock agency IQ Nazis(:wink:) would be, like with my old LX3 Panasonic, just too painstaking. I had hoped they would produce a mirrorless micro 4/3 on the same general philosophy as the K5. I think such a model from Pentax would have knocked the GH2 into a cocked hat. But Pentax appear not to take my personal requirements into consideration when making their global corporate decisions :D If I could have kept the K5 and lenses and bought the Panasonic/ Olympus stuff as well, I would have. Unfortunately, buying one means selling the other in my real world. I anyone sees any criticism of Pentax or their products in this post, they should read it again. I am as happy with the equipment as when I bought it and my thoughts would apply the same if it had been Nikon or Canon. Please no muck throwing! I just thought I'd put my view forward for what it's worth (nothing, did I hear?) as a discussion topic. My feeling is that micro 4/3 represents a fertile future development platform for all makers. Pentax, Nikon, Sony, Canon etc all make DSLRs. Why can't they all make micro 4/3rds as well?
Moving over to Pentax
Posted in Pentax Digital SLRs
There seems to be a bit of paranoia in this thread. People looking at you funny because you use a certain brand of camera? Oooer :x The Pentax K5 is a very good camera and holds its own with any other in its price range. I doubt the the OP would regret such a change but really, any comparable priced Nikon, Canon or Sony would do much the same job. Given the lenses he is being offered, a k5 would be a good buy.
Sigma 85 1.4
Posted in Lenses for Pentax Cameras
you seek a web page dthorpe.net does not have it we are ashamedMy little haiku for lost pages... The links should work now. If not, for pix link
Sigma 85 1.4
Posted in Lenses for Pentax Cameras
I have one, bought a few months ago. The first one I bought was very eccentric, it would focus perfectly, then not, then hunt around. I took it back (to MicroGlobe) and they gave me a replacement. Chalk and cheese. A very, very sharp lens, by f2.8 as sharp as any I have. It is very usable at f1.4 though you need to be very careful over your focussing accuracy! By f2 it is as sharp as you'd need and at f2.8 truly excellent. I tried the Pentax equivalent but found that by comparison it lacked contrast wide open - and is far too expensive. I don't hesitate to use the Sigma wide open and you can see why from the pix I've posted. I find the 50mm lens one of the most useful in my bag and it is the one I generally leave on the camera. I have posted some examples of the lens performance It's a big lens but very handsome on camera, as you can see below though the appearmace of a lens holds no interest for me whatever, of course :mrgreen: This is a scene I did with it at Richmond Hill last weekend.
Pentax and Full Frame
Posted in Pentax Digital SLRs
Assuming that a large part of the market for FF cameras would be professional, the main thing pros would want would be a professional backup service, service facilities, equipment loan and so on at major events. I doubt that Pentax would be interested in doing that, given that it is a market sewn up by Canon and Nikon. What would Pentax bring to the table that Nikon and Canon can't? Why, then, would a pro with batteries of specialised lenses that don't exist in the Pentax range change systems? On the other hand, neither Nikon or Canon have a medium format camera. Pentax do, and lenses to go with it. Seems an entirely logical strategy to me, APS-C To MF. What is the magic about FF? It was chosen as a format by Oscar Barnack because all that was available was cine film at the time with a width of 24mm. If the width had happened to be 16mm, then the APS-C sensor would have been FF. There's no magic in 36x24!
Shoot, then focus?
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
This is very interesting technology. However, if you read the inventor's treatise, you will see that it requires a 100mp sensor to give an 1800x1200px image which in turn needs a huge amount of software manipulation to make the IQ acceptable. Taking nothing away from it but it's a heavy price to pay for the ability to choose where you wanted to focus after the event. Not to mention that there are no 100mp sensors available yet even in medium format to give a 2.2mp image. If you want a 16mp image resolution to output, you'll be needing a (100/2.2)x16 = 720mp sensor to do it. If you don't want to take moving subjects, take a dozen images moving focus slightly and put them together using Photoshop image stacking. It's the same thing. Or how about focus bracketing instead of exposure bracketing?
Full Frame for the Insecure?
Posted in General Digital Photography chat
I have to congratulate you on one of the most incomprehensible posts I have ever seen. :cry:
NEC or LaCie Monitor for new PC
Posted in General Photographic Chat
I have a Lacie 320 which works well and pivots. Fantastic for working on portrait shots. These monitors definitely need hardware calibration to make the best of them. This monitor is very easy on the eyes as John mentions about these types. One of the things about them is that being designed for graphics, they do not exhibit the excessive brightness of many monitors, relying on a wide palette and good dynamic range for their quality and I think that is probably what makes them unfatiguing to use.
18-55 & 50-200 kit lenses
Posted in Lenses for Pentax Cameras
The standard zoom is much better than its price would suggest and stopped down to f8 is hard to better no matter what you pay.
Bad review for DA* 16-50mm
Posted in Lenses for Pentax Cameras
Since most people have no opportunity to compare lenses personally before buying them, published tests are very important. The published tests from respected sites and magazines are quite definitive but always people with an emotional attachment to a marque will see any criticism of their chosen make or it being judged less than the best as a personal slight. Others argue that manufacturing variations account for poor performance of a given lens - which makes lens buying a matter of a pig in a poke. Personally, I feel that if a makers QC is so poor, I probably wouldn't buy one of theirs anyway. In the end, the tests are all we have.
Left to Right or Right to Left?
Posted in General Photographic Chat
Perhaps you are trying to appeal to Arab viewers, John? These things are more cultural than right or wrong, are they not?