timothyw

Joined: 18th July 2011

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

timothyw
I briefly had a K10D with grip after buying it as part of a package that I wanted the lenses from. I absolutely loved the feel- I'm a big chap, and it made the camera feel that much more secure in my grip, as well as making extended portrait shooting feel much more relaxed and comfortable.

Now that I have two K-5s, I'd be very happy to have them gripped (particularly as they are smaller than the K-10) but I think the pricing for them is outrageous. £200 for the official Pentax! I'd perhaps go up to £90, maybe at a push £100, but at £200 - well, not so long ago you could get a complete DSLR body (K-30) for £320, which I think puts it into context!

I keep considering the cheap imitation grips, but I don't want to spend £30-£50 on them only to have them fall apart. I think Pentax would be doing themselves a favor if they knocked the price down and actually sold a few more of them - at £200 no one is going to buy one on a whim are they?

I think I was actually disappointed when the K-5 II was announced as it meant no new body design, and so no clearance sales of the old grips! The D-BG4 did come up sub £100 when Jessops was having a clearout a year or so back, alas at the time I was skint....

So, in answer to the topic, I think grips are essential for certain kinds of shooting (fashion, portrait, gig, wedding etc) but the price means that people are generally willing to do without, and suffer the discomfort!

Comment by timothyw posted on Grips. Essential or not? at 02/02/2013 - 14:16

timothyw
To be honest, I don't think you can go far wrong with any of those four, so it all kinda comes down to what you want.

The Pentax 16-45 is probably cheapest, but doesn't have a particularly big zoom range. It does have the Pentax colour reproduction in it's favor.

The Pentax 17-70 I owned briefly - it's got a silent focus motor, which is a plus, although it isn't the fastest in the world. You've got a bigger range than the 16-45 (and perhaps slightly better image quality) but you're paying quite a bit more for it. I did have one briefly, but let it go in favor of the Tamron - I needed the lower light capability.

The Sigma is a bit of an unknown quantity for me - I've heard a few good things, but little to recommend it ahead of the Pentax 17-70, which it is broadly similar to. If you found it for a good price, it could certainly work for you.

The Tamron I own and can recommend - you get an awful lot of bang for your buck. It's much cheaper than the rival f2.8 zooms, but has comparable image quality, as well as being very light and compact. A friend of mine had a 16-45 which became damaged, he replaced it with the Tamron and never looked back. Drawbacks are the shorter range than the 17-70, and the noisier screw drive focus.


I went for the Tamron, but I'm not saying that's the right choice for you!

Comment by timothyw posted on Lenses choice at 01/02/2013 - 12:35

timothyw
Yep, I've been to SRS and succumbed to that temptation - beautiful camera to hold, lovely pentaprism to look through, and I was able to have that tantalizing dream of travelling the world and capturing it at 40 megapixels....

Fortunately for me there's no way in hell the bank would permit that transaction! I'd recommend handling it to anyone though.

Perhaps in 10 years time they'll be going cheap second hand.

Comment by timothyw posted on On first holding a 645d at 01/02/2013 - 12:13

timothyw
I think the problem with 2 & 3 is the lack of much reference for the fishiness in the sky - the sky still looks very much like sky. You're just left with a wonky windmill in the middle of it. With that said, I do like 2 - the light catching the lifebuoy is rather striking.

I'd perhaps have tried one in portrait of just the central structure of 1 - so roughly a portrait crop of the middle third, although obviously the fisheye lens will give a much different effect than a crop would now achieve. Would perhaps of given a kind of looming menace to the structure.

All told, I think fisheye generally works best indoors. Solid first efforts though.

Comment by timothyw posted on Q Fisheye shots at 29/01/2013 - 10:39

timothyw
Good tips guys

I think the manual flash at 1/128 is a very sound idea and something I ought have tried. I always drop to manual on the camera when using the flash, I guess I need to have that little bit more faith to put the flash in manual mode too, then work off the histogram to get the exposure right.

Also good thinking on moving slightly to the right for number 5 - the lights being on the edge of their heads detracts from the photo.

I think 2 & 3 were a tough call for me which one to cull, which is why I've put both up. 3 benefits from someone else's flash going off at the time, which does make it that bit better lit, although it does make it look slightly unusual next to number 2.

I think ruthlessness in the cull is definitely the skill I need to work on- I find it hard to objectively judge which of my shots are the real keepers, and which are the weaker images. Decisiveness is key!

Comment by timothyw posted on Two Door Cinema Club Gig at 29/01/2013 - 10:01

timothyw
Yeah, not a lot of light to play with unfortunately- certainly a day when I might have been glad of the K-5 II having the better low light AF, although I don't think the actual low light sensor performance has improved any?

K5TW0016 is this one:
Comment Image


This was one of the few I actually took with the flash - I'm not sure any of the others made the cull. I was using my AF 360 with a stofen omnibounce on it to soften it a bit, I was having a real struggle balancing the flash with what little ambient light there was.
I had to really push the colour temperature in post to get the shot looking right.

I think I'd like the shot a lot more if the guy in the pink didn't appear to be mid blink/squint- possibly reacting to the preflash as I was very close to the stage.

I didn't want to push my luck so turned the flash off once I was fairly confident I had a usable flash shot.

Comment by timothyw posted on Two Door Cinema Club Gig at 28/01/2013 - 16:21

timothyw
Found myself called upon at the last minute to take some photos at a gig in the Playboy club last week. Band is Two Door Cinema Club. Comments and critique welcome!

1.
Comment Image

2.
Comment Image

3.
Comment Image

4.
Comment Image

5.
Comment Image


Shots are with K-5, Sigma 30mm f1.4 and Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Full set on Flickr here.

Comment by timothyw posted on Two Door Cinema Club Gig at 28/01/2013 - 13:44

timothyw
I'm no expert, but it seems to me that's an EF 500 DG Super, not 530.

Comment by timothyw posted on P-ttl SIGMA EF 500 DG SUPER FLASH + Cokin filters at 23/01/2013 - 12:09

timothyw
You haven't given your location, and don't appear to have sold anything on here before - would you be able to do the trade in person?

Comment by timothyw posted on Mecablitz 58 AF - 1 flash (for Pentax) at 14/01/2013 - 09:14

timothyw
Yeah, my friend has a Metz... complete with handwritten sticky label on the top to remind him how to make all the functions work!

Comment by timothyw posted on Pentax AG 360 FGZ II at 11/01/2013 - 12:00

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo