All Forum Comments
Comment by Mannesty posted on Evil Inventor at 30/09/2008 - 17:16
Quote:
Any idea why Pentax offered both side-by-side for 4 years or so?
I don't actually know but the 2.5 I guess would have been much more expensive.Any idea why Pentax offered both side-by-side for 4 years or so?
Comment by Mannesty posted on M42 Super Takumar 135mm 1:2.5 vs 1:3.5 at 30/09/2008 - 13:03
Mac wrote:
Steve,
What adds interest for me regarding shots on this forum, is some data about the camera settings, lens settings etc.
Folk are often asking for examples of various lenses and these shots may fill the bill (NOT a duck joke!)
Agreed. Camera model and lens used ought to be a minimum. Other EXIF data can be made available later.Steve,
What adds interest for me regarding shots on this forum, is some data about the camera settings, lens settings etc.
Folk are often asking for examples of various lenses and these shots may fill the bill (NOT a duck joke!)
But then, I guess that's what the gallery is for.
Comment by Mannesty posted on 22 ........ at 30/09/2008 - 11:26
stevejcoe wrote:
Thanks for the comments
I could possibly have got a little lower. I was sitting on a wall at waters edge, but the water was about 2 feet below.
Steve
Where's your sense of creativity man? Surely you could have found somebody to grab your ankles whilst you dangled over the edge. Thanks for the comments
Mannesty wrote:
To be honest, I find these images uninteresting. They seem to me to be little more than snapshots, taken from wherever you happened to be at the time.
I agree the subject is not that interesting and I was quite happily snapping away at all manner of things. What appealed to me here was the mix of; transparency and murk in the water and also the shadows and reflections.To be honest, I find these images uninteresting. They seem to me to be little more than snapshots, taken from wherever you happened to be at the time.
I could possibly have got a little lower. I was sitting on a wall at waters edge, but the water was about 2 feet below.
Steve
Actually, I'd have shot just the water, no ducks. Images like that, with a bit of work, make great backgrounds for other images.
Comment by Mannesty posted on 22 ........ at 30/09/2008 - 11:24
RobE17 wrote:
Meant to say confusion in the last line above
You can make spelling corrections using "Edit" at the bottom left of the post.Meant to say confusion in the last line above
Comment by Mannesty posted on Wide angle lens for airshows at 30/09/2008 - 11:07
Don wrote:
and,Quote:
It is always nice too know where you are
which inevitably leads one to wonder "Why am I here?"It is always nice too know where you are
where did I come from, and
where am I going, and
will I know when I get there.
Totally agree with the OP though.
Comment by Mannesty posted on Whereabouts are you? at 30/09/2008 - 10:49
28mm X 1.5 = 42mm = not very wide at all.
As far as I know there is no zoom lens that goes much wider than 18mm and extends to around 100mm.
I think you are going to need two lenses (DA* 16-50 + DA* 50-135) and maybe two bodies to avoid lens changing.
As far as I know there is no zoom lens that goes much wider than 18mm and extends to around 100mm.
I think you are going to need two lenses (DA* 16-50 + DA* 50-135) and maybe two bodies to avoid lens changing.
Comment by Mannesty posted on Wide angle lens for airshows at 30/09/2008 - 10:42
To be honest, I find these images uninteresting. They seem to me to be little more than snapshots, taken from wherever you happened to be at the time.
I feel a more creative angle could have been used. Perhaps with the camera lower, closer to the water.
I feel a more creative angle could have been used. Perhaps with the camera lower, closer to the water.
Comment by Mannesty posted on 22 ........ at 30/09/2008 - 10:39
Pentax has three wider zooms than your kit lens, other than the 17-70mm you mention. 10-17mm Fisheye, 12-24mm, and 16-45mm. The latter is not much wider than your kit lens but produces superior quality images.
The 17-70mm has only SDM focussing with its KAF3 mount (screw AF drive has been omitted from these lenses)so will be manual focus only on the older bodies.
You say you want something wider than your kit lens, up to 100mm. That is longer, not wider. Please clarify.
If you are happy with the DA* 300mm, you'll love the DA* 16-50mm & 50-135mm lenses.
The 17-70mm has only SDM focussing with its KAF3 mount (screw AF drive has been omitted from these lenses)so will be manual focus only on the older bodies.
You say you want something wider than your kit lens, up to 100mm. That is longer, not wider. Please clarify.
If you are happy with the DA* 300mm, you'll love the DA* 16-50mm & 50-135mm lenses.
Comment by Mannesty posted on Wide angle lens for airshows at 30/09/2008 - 10:02
sometimes I worry about you and think myself lucky that you are half a world away from me.