I am sure there willbe an optical element that will reduce the image circle to the sensor. If there isn't, the lenses just won't be sharp enough for such a hefty crop.

Hmm wonder if there's a glass element to focus the lens down onto the tiny sensor? Or is the illustrated DA40mm converted by the crop factor into a very fuzzy supertelephoto?

FOR SALE: PENTAX SMC-A 80-200mm

A very lightweight, small, internal focussing 80-200mm zoom. Manual focus, but has the A setting. Benefits from stopping down to f8, but then again, so does the DA50-200mm. I guess this lens is an option if you're skint but need something longer, or rarely use a long lens but want one, or need something really lightweight in your kit bag.

The lens does not extend when zooming.




I have used it a lot (as you can tell from the scuff marks on the lens barrel) and find the IQ more than acceptable. The optics are absolutely fine.




35.00 GBP inc. delivery to UK.

It's an excellent little plug in. I don't think AG's shot is unnacceptably soft, given it's a 100% crop, but look how much extra detail you can pull out.

Such sensors are already out there, and being used in cameras like the canon S95. Pentax just don't use them (except for the Q).

It's a future aspiration I think... it will take time before Nikon start rolling their own sensors.

The Sigma doesn't have a brilliant reputation (the 24mm version DOES though - look out for that one!) I have had the Pentax 28mm, it was OK but f2.8 wasn't really that good.

I would swerve both of these options and get the Pentax K 28mm f3.5, if you must have that focal length. However... I much prefer the Sigma 24mm Superwide II for it's wider focal length on APSC, and excellent wide open performance. I have a set on flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28055843@N04/sets/72157619998930595/

I think the move to the 24MP Sony sensor is almost inevitable for Pentax's next top model... an exercise in 'keeping up with the Joneses' rather than improving print quality.... at that level even cropping is probably limited as much by the lens as the sensor resolution. But I'm sure Sony's technical wizards will be able to pull it off with minimal effect on noise, DR etc, so I can't see an actual downside... apart from the need for larger cards, extra storage space, better computers etc...

Have you any of the shadow / highlight compensation features turned on? If so, you will not be able to access IS0100 until you turn them off.

I think they're just overcropped - probably 1:1 or near! The heron was probably on the other side of the fjord

This amount of blur / noise is probably fine on the pixel level. Displaying images like this is fine for showing the performance of the sensor, but it's never going to be very satisfactory from an aesthetic point of view. And it's cheating!

I do not see why setting the camera to a lower resolution would improve picture quality whatsoever - unless the pixels could be 'grouped' to create larger photosites and reduce noise etc. But that isn't the case for most cameras.