All Forum Comments
Comment by wadna posted on B&H bargains at 26/11/2012 - 21:22
Join the club mate. My big clumsy fingers hate the lack of room available to them. Some days I think I'll never get hold of the card but other days it comes out like magic.
And yeah, I've nearly resorted to tweezers on the bad days but I'm stubborn & just keep fumbling.
And yeah, I've nearly resorted to tweezers on the bad days but I'm stubborn & just keep fumbling.
Comment by wadna posted on K5 & SD card removal at 25/11/2012 - 21:00
Shutter button all the time. Then my trigger finger is always ready. I can't think why I would want to use the rear button; it's clumsy, slow & there is the likely confusion with the LV button.
Comment by wadna posted on Which AF method? Rear or shutter button? at 12/08/2012 - 01:37
"The surface of FF (36*24mm) is exactly the double of the APS-C (24x18mm)."
According to my K-5 manual the sensor is 23.7*15.7 which means the 35mm size sensor is roughly 2.3 times bigger.
And you get less with Canon with the 60D sensor 22.3*14.9 so FF is 2.6 times bigger.
According to my K-5 manual the sensor is 23.7*15.7 which means the 35mm size sensor is roughly 2.3 times bigger.
And you get less with Canon with the 60D sensor 22.3*14.9 so FF is 2.6 times bigger.
Comment by wadna posted on "K-5 now officially discontinued in Japan" at 10/08/2012 - 13:10
Oh, and by the way, the Nikon D800 with it's stratospheric 36MP sensor is equivalent to about 16MP on an APS-C sensor which is K-5 level.
Comment by wadna posted on "K-5 now officially discontinued in Japan" at 10/08/2012 - 13:04
"Happy to be educated here, but why isn't the 645D regarded as the Pentax 'FF' camera? Because it's not 35mm equivalent?"
Because as John has explained it's 1.7 times bigger than 35mm size sensors.
Perhaps also because, though the 645D (at A$12,000) is cheap for MF, it makes the pro 35mm size sensor cameras look cheap! (Nikon D4 A$7,000 & Canon D1x A$7,700).
Because as John has explained it's 1.7 times bigger than 35mm size sensors.
Perhaps also because, though the 645D (at A$12,000) is cheap for MF, it makes the pro 35mm size sensor cameras look cheap! (Nikon D4 A$7,000 & Canon D1x A$7,700).
Comment by wadna posted on "K-5 now officially discontinued in Japan" at 10/08/2012 - 12:38
SkyRider wrote:
Pedantic mathematician crawling back underneath his rock now...after all, 12Mp/APSC has been a sufficient pixel density for most purposes for several years.
According to my calculator it's about 10.3 megapixels & according to my lost in the mists of time schooling 1.5*1.5=2.25 which goes to show the crop factor is an approximation as 24/2.25=10.7 approx.szgabor wrote:
The FF 24 megapixel has the same pixel density like the APS-C 16 megapixel.
Slightly off-topic, but 24 megapixels FF is nearer 12 megapixels APS-C - the number of pixels is a function of area rather than a linear one so you need to multiply by the crop factor twice.The FF 24 megapixel has the same pixel density like the APS-C 16 megapixel.
Pedantic mathematician crawling back underneath his rock now...after all, 12Mp/APSC has been a sufficient pixel density for most purposes for several years.
Comment by wadna posted on "K-5 now officially discontinued in Japan" at 10/08/2012 - 12:26
mera wrote:
I used the high-speed machine gun mode for the first time ever on Saturday to capture the Olympic road race. The camera slowed down before all of the peleton had swept past. I wonder if the low speed mode would have been better in this situation. I feel 3fps would have been ideal. Maybe the next camera...
Luckily the Brits were all at the front so they were always captured in the high speed burst.
I'm sure it would have - 3.3 is quite effective in my experience. I used it for a rodeo with good results. Perhaps I missed the "peak of the action" moment but I was pleased with the results.I used the high-speed machine gun mode for the first time ever on Saturday to capture the Olympic road race. The camera slowed down before all of the peleton had swept past. I wonder if the low speed mode would have been better in this situation. I feel 3fps would have been ideal. Maybe the next camera...
Luckily the Brits were all at the front so they were always captured in the high speed burst.
Of course it depends if you're shooting jpeg.
My K-7 manual claims 17 frames shooting RAW LO speed (nearly 6 secs.) or you can fill the card using jpeg - the peleton should be long gone!
The K-7 on Hi (5.2fps) claims 15 RAW (3 secs) or 40 frames using jpeg.
By contrast the K-5 on Hi is 30 jpg's (4 secs) or 20 RAW.
Comment by wadna posted on POLL. How useful is the K-5 Low speed continuous 1.6fps at 31/07/2012 - 00:27
McGregNi wrote:
It was interesting to see earlier in this thread some confusion caused by the term 'Continuous', which Pentax use for an autofocus function (AF-C) and for 'Continuous Shooting', which is a drive mode setting to keep the camera firing with the shutter button held down.
Thinking about it, I don't think this term suits either function very well - in the case of autofocus, what is actually happening is that the autofocus locks on and then 'tracks' a moving object. What about calling this 'tracking' autofocus - AF-T, seems good!
And then there is this 'continuous' shooting drive mode. This allows us to fire off 'bursts' of shots, up to the limits as specified - or with the slow mode Jpegs until the card is full. Neither of these is really 'continuous' either, is it? Wouldn't this be better called 'Burst Shooting Mode'?
Sounds sensible to me.It was interesting to see earlier in this thread some confusion caused by the term 'Continuous', which Pentax use for an autofocus function (AF-C) and for 'Continuous Shooting', which is a drive mode setting to keep the camera firing with the shutter button held down.
Thinking about it, I don't think this term suits either function very well - in the case of autofocus, what is actually happening is that the autofocus locks on and then 'tracks' a moving object. What about calling this 'tracking' autofocus - AF-T, seems good!
And then there is this 'continuous' shooting drive mode. This allows us to fire off 'bursts' of shots, up to the limits as specified - or with the slow mode Jpegs until the card is full. Neither of these is really 'continuous' either, is it? Wouldn't this be better called 'Burst Shooting Mode'?
Comment by wadna posted on POLL. How useful is the K-5 Low speed continuous 1.6fps at 30/07/2012 - 23:18
Smeggypants wrote:
Also remember that the 1.6fps is dependent on the shutter speed. The longer the shutter speed the less FPS you get
And also, for moving targets, Auto Focus speed.Also remember that the 1.6fps is dependent on the shutter speed. The longer the shutter speed the less FPS you get
Comment by wadna posted on POLL. How useful is the K-5 Low speed continuous 1.6fps at 29/07/2012 - 04:16
Scroll down to Pentax Lenses (60% off).
link