I know, but that was a plea, rather than a demand. If Pentax produce what I say in the other thread, then fine, it will suit my needs, I will let others decide if I produce good or bad images. In the meantime I will continue to use the tools what I have in the hope I can capture images that will please me, and hopefully please others at the same time.

In the end though, I still stand by my last comment that a camera is only a tool. But of course a lot of us will continue to look at additional kit, not because it may produce better images because it is a "better" camera, but because we have found a shotcoming in the kit that would be a desirable, rather than a necessity.


If I was a Pro, thereby relying on my equipment to keep my housed and fed, and my existing kit was not suitable, then I would add or change. But I am not (as are most of us here), so will continue to use and learn accordingly.

not 18 AF points but 11 - Fine, its the usual AF unit, but with a new processor.
7FPS - Excellent!
3 levels of RAW compression - interesting.
16MP - Understandable expecially as it will be the standard for prosumer (Canon apart). Do we know who has made it? My bet is on Sony.
80-51000ISO. Well that is the USP for APS-C. Will be interesting how it performs at that high an ISO. (Probably not good, but it will mean that 6400 will be excellent and 12800 good)

They are tough to shoot as they fly quickly and erratically.

All I can say is (and I will do this myself) practice and take lots of shots, watch them in flight. Apart from that, I can't help more.

Reading this tread has been interesting yet very frustrating.

Yes FF would be desirable, but nowadays not necessary. Yes you get more resolution and less susceptable to noise at hi ISO's. But think about it we now have APS-C cameras providing seriously good images at anything up to 6400ISO. Even now, 25600ISO is common amongst APS-C, a thought which would have been in dreamland back in film days. (be honest, how many of you bought 800ISO film. most of us bought 100, 200 or 400 if we wanted a bit of speed)
Technology has played a big part. I was reading an old AP who complained the 400ISO on the Olympus was noisy. Now? we all can get excellent smooth images at 2000ISO even 3200ISO.

As for sensor size and this FF issue. Think about it the Canon 1D is not a full frame camera, only APS-H (1Ds is the FF version) Do you hear 1D owners complain about the lack of full frame? Of course not!

Lenses. Yes, Pentax range of lenses are limited, but what they do make are excellent! Yes we would like longer lengths (400mm+) and I am sure they will come. But 3 versions of a 50mm that Canon do? Even Canon pros prefer the F1.4 over the F1.2. Sure there are certain fast wide primes that we would like, 24 F1.4 30 F1.4 etc, but how often, honestly, are you going to shoot wide open.

Older lenses and cheaper lenses. So older lenses are MF on the whole, well focus manually. Cheaper lenses. not as sharp (define sharp) Okay, they might not give you edge to edge sharpness that hurts the eyes, instead use them creatively. (that link to a 5D with a 105 year old lens is a case in point)

Fast AF. What are you going to shoot? Portraits, no need for fast AF, Landscapes, again AF speed not an issue, still life (ditto, see a pattern here?) Sports, well yes a fast AF would be good here, but how often are you going to shoot sport. If you are going to solely shoot sport, then fast AF, if not, then work with your camera and adapt.

"K-7 can underexpose" Yes it might out of the box, but again adapt accordingly, add 0.3 exposure to adjust. Its not rocket science.

At the end of the day, ALL DSLR's can produce stunning images and the difference between FF and APS-C 95% of the time is negligable.

Finally, remember this, a good photographer will get stunning images from a compact. A poor photographer will get poor images from a top FF camera. The photographer is the one who creates the image, the camera is only a tool to record it.

Rant over......

Tell me, it starts with a compact, then a DSLR, then LBA, then CBA.....

And all we do is take photos......

Thats the tilt done, but what about the shift?

This will be interesting.

Samyang 35mm F1.4 with MF

Vs

Pentax SMC-DAL 35mm F2.4 with AF

Large lens V small lens.

Similar price? (well Samyang are regarded as bargain price)

A recent AP put the Samyang 85mm F1.4 against the Nikon 85mm F1.4 and it came out well. It didn't beat the Nikon, but they did say is was excellent. For this reason Samyang are coming on leaps and bounds, and if they decide to go AF, look out Sigma and Tamron!

However I think it will go down to what you want, discreet and AF with the Pentax, or, Shallow DOF and manual focus, yet more noticable with the Samyang....

Tough choice.

That would be nice, but I can't see it, shame.....

However if I win that lottery......

Hmmmmm, interesting. Didn't realise that Zenith (or Zenit) were still around? I don't have this lens, but have old Zenit and Praktica kit with M42 mount.

It might be worth a play, but don't expect FA quality or sharpness. Could be fun though.

However, my biggest concern is the price that they are wanting. £50! If it was a tenner it might be worth a punt, but £50 is in F1.7 territory and M50's and M55's. and I know which I would prefer.

Hope this helps.

I was just about to post a link but you beat me......

Nice to see you can finally have a tilt/shift lens on the K mount for the first time in years..

My only concern is that on digital they are a bit long. Personally I would have preferred something around the 24mm mark. However at 50mm it will be nice for closer stuff and the 90mm even closer.

Would I want one? yes please!