MattMatic

Joined: 2nd July 2002

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

MattMatic
I would also recommend looking at the MX-1. Bought one for my son and am astounded at the output from it. Trumps the original Q easily! And the articulated screen is a great addition. Seriously want one for me now

For travel with dSLR I found the DA17-70 plus DA55-300 was a great set. When I upgraded to the DA*16-50 the DA55-300 still comes along. Very capable telephoto - and I really like the 200 to 300mm for travel It's not up with the DA*50-135 but superb for the weight/price combination.

The only tiny thing is that there are no MX-1 Lightroom profiles at the moment. The Q has profiles, and I have found that they can make a huge difference to IQ in processing - even the DA12-24 leaps up from its raw state to another level. Not sure if there are Q7 profiles yet for the lenses...

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Kamera Quandaries at 20/03/2014 - 13:30

MattMatic
Answered already here I believe!
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on MUP and bracketing help on K-3 at 19/03/2014 - 15:16

MattMatic
Quote:
I was disappointed with it's resolution
Reckon you had a poor copy
I found the 17-70 at f/4 gave similar resolution to the 50/1.4 at f/4 - which is saying something!

The focus ring is incredibly light, and this did cause hunting (actually over/under shooting) on some bodies at the 70mm end. It wasn't often for me, but then I use centre focus only and the AF button to trigger focus. When it did show itself, gently resting a finger on the focus ring slugged it enough to lock on immediately.

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Companion Recommendation for my DA* 50 135 at 18/03/2014 - 21:13

MattMatic
Quote:
It is not as good as the *50-135,
Personally, I haven't found anything quite as good as the DA*50-135... yet
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Companion Recommendation for my DA* 50 135 at 18/03/2014 - 09:21

MattMatic
The DA17-70 is a fine lens. I found it astonishingly good - on a par with the 50/1.4 even. Bokeh and colour is very nice indeed, and it complemented the 50-135 very well.

Eventually I stumped up for the DA*16-50 which has the Pentax "pixie dust" for rendering. Does have PF but almost 100% corrected in raw with LR lens profiles. Unlike the 50-135 the barrel extends on zoom.

As a walk-about lens the 17-70 is excellent, and I still hanker for it!
But then you'll probably need the DA12-24 too

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Companion Recommendation for my DA* 50 135 at 18/03/2014 - 06:22

MattMatic
That image is two adapters

One is the C mount to Pentax Q (available from eBay).
And then a C mount telescope adapter.

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Pentax Q to telescope adapter at 12/03/2014 - 09:08

MattMatic
Quality shots of a subject familiar to me
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on A Fond Farewell From Me at 11/03/2014 - 10:35

MattMatic
I've tried it with a PK mount cover...

Took some fine copper and a needle to make the hole, then glued that over a larger hole in the cover (better than just a hole in the plastic).

Was fun to try, but results were dreadful! Probably had to have a better quality hole

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Q Mount Shield Lens 07 at 28/02/2014 - 16:53

MattMatic

Comment by MattMatic posted on SRS, Top Banana at 14/02/2014 - 13:48

MattMatic
When I had the 17-70 I found that the incredibly light-weight focus ring caused the camera to over and undershoot focus.

Gently resting a finger on the focus ring to dampen the loop stopped the hunting. YMMV.

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on 17-70mm focusing issues at 07/02/2014 - 12:01

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo