aint it the truth, the good stuff always happens when you're changing memory cards/lenses/films lol.

It'd be handy in sports photography though, if you're trying to get the moment of a hit in fencing, catch in frisbee, goal or kick in football etc. 3 or even 5FPS just doesn't cut it at the speed some sports go. If I open up my K10D on a Sabre bout I get maybe three frames, "en guard", "charge" and "hit".

that 4.5-6.3 70-300 seems a bit steep for such a slow lens. I think Sony perhaps have an inflated opinion of what their name means in the DSLR arena.


Interesting thought. I wonder if these are going to be the camera equivalent of the PS3. That is, looks good at announcement, finally arrives 18 months after the competition with a severely reduced spec.

Looks like Sony really are giving the DSLR game a proper go, their silence since the A100 launch was beginning to make me wonder.

It will be interesting to see if these new offerings turn out as well in the hand as they look on paper. On paper at least that A1 looks like it could tare the Canon 1DS MkIII a new CF card slot.

I've never used one but I can't imagine a Pentax SMC prime being bad.

see some other users comments here

I always refer to that site when I'm considering a Pentax lens, older ones especially. For some reason that link takes you to the older version of the lens, scroll down just a bit to find the SMC-M version you have

The magnification issue is a little confusing in some ways, but here goes:

In the purest sense, no the macro will still be 1:2. This is because the macro ratio refers to the size of the image vs the size of the object and takes no account of sensor size.

However, since the sensor is smaller you need less magnification to fill the frame, so for most practical purposes it is as if the magnification has increased by 50%.

If you want to get closer still, I'd probably opt for extension tubes. You can always use a reversing ring as well if you really want to get close.

The advantage with the tubes is that the focus control on the lens will still work so you can adjust fine focus that way rather than having to move the camera (the focus does nothing on a reversed prime).

because the meter cells are in the pentaprism housing, so the light they look at goes through the screen.

it's interesting to note that the error seems to get worse in lower light and/or at tighter F stops.

Note that as far as the camera is concerned in this mode there is no difference between F1.4 in the dark and F16 in bright sun, as it is metering purely on the amount of light passing through the lens at shooting aperture.

If you take a *ist series DSLR and use an M series lens in really low light, you'll notice (or at least I do on both mine and my Dads DL2) that it starts to underexpose as the light gets really bad.

To make a *ist do this is quite difficult and requires pretty poor lighting conditions, like say extreme macro under tungsten room lights at F16. I do wonder though if the K10D is just exhibiting the same problem more severely such that it becomes apparent under more normal shooting conditions.

sorry that this doesn't really answer any of the questions, just an observation I found interesting and thought I'd throw into the melting pot.

well done, I especially like the last two, good eye and really good timing on the last one.

might be worth giving "vows" the neat image treatment. There is a free demo of neatimage which is quite usable and will probably clean up that noise well.

It's all about having the right tool for the job in hand. Here is an example:

I have been fencing at inter-university level for about 3 years. I have always taken my camera along with me to matches. When I first started out I was a penniless student so I picked up a beat up old MZ-50 and SMC 50mm F2 from Ebay. This kit cost me something like £50 in total, but with ISO1600 film it did the trick.

On more than one occasion at matches I encountered others attempting to take pictures with DSLRs. They were generally using kit zooms and got nowhere at great speed in the dingy fencing gyms, while my trusty F2 (and later an A series 1.7) allowed me to keep the shutter speed up for crisp shots most of the time.

Those DSLRs cost at least 10x more than my MZ-50, in general use they were undoubtedly superior, in that situation they were paperweights.

Higher price does not mean better, it just means more expensive. You have to realise what is important for the shots you want to take and then pay the appropriate price, whether that tag is attached to a £10 SMC-M 50mm F2 or a £500 SMC-DA* 50-135.

Of course if there has been confusion and the tag from the former has become attached to the latter, you should buy very very fast and then run before they realise their mistake, but surely that is obvious

kimbo, if you know where I can get a KA adaptall mount for under £20 I'd be most interested!

still they aren't TOO expensive, at some point I shall convince myself I want one enough to buy one, at which point the price will probably double. I have a KM mount on my macro lens atm.

The 90mm also combines very nicely with the 2x flat field adaptall converter to make a 180mm tele-macro. Very useful for wildlife closeups when working distance is everything.