All Forum Comments
Payment sent for 55mm
Comment by milamber posted on K30 Body (Black), Tamron 17-35mm, Pentax 55m f/1.8, LCW 77mm ND filter at 15/01/2013 - 14:20
pm sent re 55mm
Comment by milamber posted on K30 Body (Black), Tamron 17-35mm, Pentax 55m f/1.8, LCW 77mm ND filter at 15/01/2013 - 10:58
PIRATE wrote:
Ahoy!
Unless I'm just getting confused, I thought there was some sort of PU membership 'benefit' when ordering from SRS in the form of free postage. So, to my surprise, I found the same item (Sigma AF 50-200mm DC OS HSM) on SRS's evilBay page for the same price as their website with free postage already offered to anyone. This begs the question 'where does the PU membership free delivery 'benefit' come into play' as it's already included for members and non-members alike on the auction site?
One other point of note is that assuming lenses are classified as 'electricals' then by clicking via TopCashBack should earn 30% or so from the vendors fees when buying off The Bay, but it seems a better option to buy via evilBay than from their website, but I just can't help wondering if the PU membership free postage was meant to be an exclusive 'benefit', but apparently it appears not. Hopefully the little zoom will be perfectly fine as the Tamron version is being sold by Currys for a shade under £90.00, but I used to own the Tammy and the regular Sigma 50-200mm DC and TBH, they're pretty good budget lenses as far as short zooms are concerned.
When I buy from SRS I always check Ebay first - sometimes they have listings on there that aren't on the website and vice versa. Sometimes Ebay is cheaper, sometimes not. It doesn't bother me whether I get the free postage via Ebay or the website - SRS are still usually the best bet to buy from.Ahoy!
Unless I'm just getting confused, I thought there was some sort of PU membership 'benefit' when ordering from SRS in the form of free postage. So, to my surprise, I found the same item (Sigma AF 50-200mm DC OS HSM) on SRS's evilBay page for the same price as their website with free postage already offered to anyone. This begs the question 'where does the PU membership free delivery 'benefit' come into play' as it's already included for members and non-members alike on the auction site?
One other point of note is that assuming lenses are classified as 'electricals' then by clicking via TopCashBack should earn 30% or so from the vendors fees when buying off The Bay, but it seems a better option to buy via evilBay than from their website, but I just can't help wondering if the PU membership free postage was meant to be an exclusive 'benefit', but apparently it appears not. Hopefully the little zoom will be perfectly fine as the Tamron version is being sold by Currys for a shade under £90.00, but I used to own the Tammy and the regular Sigma 50-200mm DC and TBH, they're pretty good budget lenses as far as short zooms are concerned.
Using Quidco or Topcashback - it makes no odds what section you click through on - you get the cashback anyway. I've often used the 'clothing' or 'home and garden' links (especially when I'm in a hurry after spotting something ending soon!) when buying lenses and it still works fine.
Comment by milamber posted on SRS & PU Membership Free Postage at 14/01/2013 - 10:20
I've had two kit lenses - a Mk2 non WR which was excellent and a WR one which was really poor on the same camera so there must be variation in samples
Comment by milamber posted on Lens weight and camera shake ? at 13/01/2013 - 19:08
I had one e-mail saying the deal would be honoured, then one saying it wouldn't and I'd get a refund (wrong amount though), then the one you posted earlier, now this one:
"We have important information for those of you who purchased Groupons for this deal.
Please note:
Following yesterdays email confirming that Jessops have gone into administration, we would like to let you know that we are still working hard to secure your order. We are working with Sandisk directly and should be able to confirm your delivery sometime next week. Thank you for your continued patience"
Not sure what is happening now - perhaps a card AND a refund
"We have important information for those of you who purchased Groupons for this deal.
Please note:
Following yesterdays email confirming that Jessops have gone into administration, we would like to let you know that we are still working hard to secure your order. We are working with Sandisk directly and should be able to confirm your delivery sometime next week. Thank you for your continued patience"
Not sure what is happening now - perhaps a card AND a refund
Comment by milamber posted on Jessops Sandisk memory card offer through Groupon at 11/01/2013 - 18:43
I'll take one of the lens rear caps, please, if you can let me know how much postage would be. Thanks
Comment by milamber posted on Pentax Lens Caps and Chargers at 11/01/2013 - 12:25
I was in exactly the same situation with an upcoming trip. I had the DA* 300mm for a while which is a great, if pricey, lens, but found the weight excessive, especially for traveling. I now have the DA 55-300mm instead. It's heaps better than anything else in the price range - you should be able to pick up a good used one for around £190 or so. The 50-200 is nice, but not on a par with the 55-300mm and the extra reach is useful. It's relatively small and portable as well - another bonus for traveling.
Amazon at £225 is the best new price at the moment, I think
Amazon at £225 is the best new price at the moment, I think
Comment by milamber posted on preparing for patagonia at 11/01/2013 - 11:05
DrOrloff wrote:
I got the Q as a complementary camera to the K5 as I wanted a go everywhere option that was pocketable and also good for sneaky street shooting. The IQ was a pleasant surprise. I'm with Andrew's thoughts on the appeal of the Q. I also had the choice between the Q and a compact. However, if I were going somewhere with great photo opportunities and not taking a DSLR then I would have reservations.
I use the Q only with the 01 normal prime. It's compact and fast and sharp. It's pocketable, but just. Cargo pant pocketable rather than shirt pocket pocketable, which is fine for me. The zooms though are quite a bit larger than the prime and the extra width really makes a big difference to pocketability. The Q is screaming out for a wide angle prime. One is in the pipeline and if it hadn't been I would have gone for a compact instead.
Image quality is very good indeed for what it is. I find optimal results at the faster end of the lens. I do however disagree with those who think that image quality is not far short of a dslr, I think it is. The Q produces surprisingly good results when used optimally, but there are plenty of shooting situations where too much noise starts to creep in. My niece got a Nikon something1 and I have been very impressed with the results. I wouldn't recommend that as an option but for me it did demonstrate that the larger sensor makes a big difference.
If I were going on an exotic trip with great photo opportunities and wanted to take one discreet camera then it would not be the Q. I would go for a high end compact. The new MX-1 looks really good. I would take a look at the Olympus XV-2 which seems to have the same lens and sensor and if the image quality was good enough I'd wait for the MX-1. Otherwise it would be the Sony RX100.
Thanks. More or less decided on a Q for a number of reasons - price, size, ability to swap lenses rather than have one fixed lens, options for experimentation with my K mount lenses and, of course, enabling me to continue contributing to this site which would be lost if I get other than PentaxI got the Q as a complementary camera to the K5 as I wanted a go everywhere option that was pocketable and also good for sneaky street shooting. The IQ was a pleasant surprise. I'm with Andrew's thoughts on the appeal of the Q. I also had the choice between the Q and a compact. However, if I were going somewhere with great photo opportunities and not taking a DSLR then I would have reservations.
I use the Q only with the 01 normal prime. It's compact and fast and sharp. It's pocketable, but just. Cargo pant pocketable rather than shirt pocket pocketable, which is fine for me. The zooms though are quite a bit larger than the prime and the extra width really makes a big difference to pocketability. The Q is screaming out for a wide angle prime. One is in the pipeline and if it hadn't been I would have gone for a compact instead.
Image quality is very good indeed for what it is. I find optimal results at the faster end of the lens. I do however disagree with those who think that image quality is not far short of a dslr, I think it is. The Q produces surprisingly good results when used optimally, but there are plenty of shooting situations where too much noise starts to creep in. My niece got a Nikon something1 and I have been very impressed with the results. I wouldn't recommend that as an option but for me it did demonstrate that the larger sensor makes a big difference.
If I were going on an exotic trip with great photo opportunities and wanted to take one discreet camera then it would not be the Q. I would go for a high end compact. The new MX-1 looks really good. I would take a look at the Olympus XV-2 which seems to have the same lens and sensor and if the image quality was good enough I'd wait for the MX-1. Otherwise it would be the Sony RX100.
I have to say though your post does raise all the issues I had when I first started thinking about what to do. Q and a high end compact perhaps, but then I'm starting to build the kit up again! Already carrying a tiny HD camcorder - all pocketable, but would need lots of pockets....
Comment by milamber posted on Q over quality compact? at 11/01/2013 - 08:50
Thanks - I e-mailed Chris a few hours back, but not until after office hours. He is usually very helpful. Will be in Colombo again in March, but just a short visit this time
Can't find any reviews of the 15-45mm yet - it would be nice to have.
Can't find any reviews of the 15-45mm yet - it would be nice to have.
Comment by milamber posted on Q over quality compact? at 10/01/2013 - 19:29
I was going to ask the same, Dave. I know they were available for under £300 a while back, but can't find anything close to that now. Q and 5-15mm is still available for £199 at SRS. If I find anything better I'll let you know.
Comment by milamber posted on Q over quality compact? at 10/01/2013 - 18:45
