|
sweat poteto posted:I'd opt for the f/4 for the reach but it depends what you actually want to do with it. You could get the 2.8 and use a teleconverter to extended it when needed. If you're just getting it for fun maybe try a cheaper tele first - it's a lot of money to drop on something without a purpose. If it helps any... I already have the kit tele lens - Sigma 75-300mm - and I already have a teleconverter. My use for this set-up would be for hobby sports photography, general long-range photography (birds, animals, etc) and to a lesser extent a bit of portraiture. I took the lens and the teleconverter with me on a weekend away to a fire brigade demo. While I was happy with a lot of the shots, there were a few that I would have been happier with if i could have nailed the focus a little more. This probably says more about me than the equipment, though.
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2010 23:00 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 09:13 |
|
|
Sounds like the 60-250 is the best fit. You could probably use a 1.4x tc for birds + spectator sports and still autofocus.
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2010 00:58 |
|
|
Woohoo. Just ordered a used K10D body (EX) from KEH for $275. Hopefully it'll be a good step up from my partially-broken hundred dollar point-and-shoot (Samsung S850). I pretty much just wanted something for my manual p/k and m42 lenses that wouldn't cost a ton... kinda wondering if I should have gone for the $550 K-X kit instead though and tossed a $200 certificate at it. Video mode still sounded kinda tempting. Bah. Oh well. I guess if I end up not liking the K10, I can resell it for about the same price or something. Stupid to get buyer's remorse before the damned thing even arrives, heh. e: okay, the K10d is pretty rad. Has some pretty deep scratches on the viewing screen, but other than that, it seems to be working just fine. Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at Apr 17, 2010 around 15:13 |
| # ? Mar 26, 2010 00:24 |
|
is go
|
Last week, I found a K1000 in my closet. Now, I have no recollection of owning a K1000, and I have never taken a photography class, so this was a bit of a surprise. I asked some people where it might have come from, but in the meantime I shot a couple of rolls. I came to find out that it belongs to my mother's best friend (don't ask me how it ended up in my closet, because I don't know) and he'd like it back. Of course, during the week I had it, I ended up really enjoying it, so I picked up a K1000 SE from eBay for the princely sum of $14 because the dude thought the light meter didn't work (it works fine, by the way). I also picked up a few lenses that were available on the cheap, either from eBay or the old K1000's actual owner - a 50mm f/2 (which, as I understand, was the standard lens for this camera), a 135mm f/3.5, and a Sigma 70-210mm f/4. Now I'm reading my way through basic photography 101 crap as fast as I can and learning what I'm supposed to be doing. So I guess what I'm saying is Hi, nice to be here.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2010 00:25 |
|
|
Go get a 28mm f/2.8. That and the 50mm f/2 will keep you running for a good long while.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2010 00:43 |
|
|
I bought a K10D on ebay at the beginning of this week, now I'm eagerly awaiting its arrival. I lost a couple of lens auctions, but I did win a Sigma 100-300mm 1:4.5-6.7, which arrived a couple of days ago because the seller wasn't too far away. Now I can't stop playing with the lens, I'll probably break it before I even have a chance to shoot through it.  I'm also looking for a basic middle-of-the-road zoom, something like a 35-80mm. There are a bunch of options on ebay for between $40 and $100, but because some people don't post much detail in their ebay sales, it's hard to know what's what. I've narrowed it down to: (links to ebay) My first choice This thing that might be "F" rather than "FA" One of the hundreds just like this available The second and third thing I put up there might or might not be exactly the same thing; the reviews and Pentax-gear-head sites I've found don't always let me determine exactly what I'm looking at when I'm on some random ebay seller's auction. I've got a bunch of stuff for my old Minolta X700, including some fun and interesting filters, all in 49mm diameter. For this reason alone, my preference is for a lens with a 49mm filter diameter. There's also the Tamron 28-80mm (for example), and some other lenses, all with filter diameters larger than 49mm. It would probably cost me about $30-$40 to replace my 49mm accessories with equivalents in another size like 52mm or 55mm. The reviews I've seen for these lenses tend to emphasize their very basic nature, and complaints about "softness" are common. I don't know exactly what that means, though I can guess, and at this point I'm looking for a basic, even kit-level lens that will let me get to know my new camera so I'll have a good idea of what I want when it comes time to spend a more serious block of money on a really good lens. EDIT: Bought my first choice, for less than I expected. 
ExecuDork fucked around with this message at Apr 19, 2010 around 03:37 |
| # ? Apr 17, 2010 03:00 |
|
|
King Hotpants posted:Last week, I found a K1000 in my closet.
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2010 09:47 |
|
|
quote:Last week, I found a K1000 in my closet. HPL posted:Go get a 28mm f/2.8. That and the 50mm f/2 will keep you running for a good long while. Yes! The 28/2.8 is $50-60 and will give you much greater flexibility. Don't shoot it wide open and it's a great lens. If you spot it, the 35mm f/3.5 is very sharp but slower. Fixed-focal length lenses will produce much higher quality images. A 50mm f/2 at f/8 is as sharp as it gets on 35mm. Pentax gear won't cost much more than no-brand gear, so I buy mostly Pentax lenses. Zoom (variable focal length, not to be confused with telephoto) lenses generally produce lower-quality images (in the consumer grade, at least) but many of the 70-200s will be good. 35-105s, 35-70s, 20-200s and the like particularly suck - consumer superzooms are the worst of all. The SE is way easier to shoot as I'm sure you've noticed. If you spot one, a Pentax ME is smaller, aperture-priority (you're very probably past figuring out equivalent exposures  ), and has a bigger brighter viewfinder. In comparison to my K1000, it's like going from a cinema screen to an IMAX screen. Don't pay more than $20 for one. The ME Super is about $50 and lets you manually select a speed - the ME doesn't. Shutter changed too, the ME goes up to 1/1000 and syncs at 1/100, the Super goes to 1/2000th and syncs at 1/125th.If you feel the urge to switch to a digital SLR, please remember that only SMC Pentax-A and up lenses will work natively on Pentax DSLRs - with SMC Pentax-M and SMC Pentax lenses you have to do the same shenanigans as if you were using an adapter (stop down metering with the green button). Nikon DSLRs can't mount Pentax lenses, but Canon DSLRs handle it more gracefully than Pentax ones, ironically. Welcome to a second potentially expensive hobby.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2010 02:07 |
|
|
So I'm thinking of upgrading to a K7 this summer. I'm currently a K200D user. The main reasons for this are for the video mode and the faster shutter fps/larger buffer. I swear my K200D only shoots about 3FPS on RAW and the buffer fills up after 5 frames. How's the video quality on the K7, and are there any problems with it? I'm pretty sure there are a couple of K7 users in this thread and I'd like to hear from them.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2010 02:31 |
|
|
A second expensive hobby? You think I only have two? Ha. Hahahahaha. Haha. I went ahead and did my homework before I started shooting, so I know all about zoom vs. telephoto and the shittiness of most consumer-level zoom lenses in decades past. Apparently they've gotten better in the past little while, but I'm not buying gear from the past little while, so I'm steering clear. I grabbed the Sigma for convenience's sake, but I find that I don't use it very much at all. Most of the time, I stick the 50mm on the camera and just leave it be. I'm still going to buy a bag that'll hold my other lenses, though, just in case I find a great shot that'd look even better if had just brought my 135mm. I know it'll happen the day I leave everything at home.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2010 02:47 |
|
|
King Hotpants posted:I'm still going to buy a bag that'll hold my other lenses, though, just in case I find a great shot that'd look even better if had just brought my 135mm. I know it'll happen the day I leave everything at home. Yeah, this seems to happen to me all the drat time. I take my 50/4 macro? I will find nothing interesting OR close up, at least until it gets dark. Take the 35mm? Nothing but pretty birds sitting just out of reach. Take the 200mm? Everything happens right beside me.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2010 03:32 |
|
|
Kazy posted:So I'm thinking of upgrading to a K7 this summer. I'm currently a K200D user. The main reasons for this are for the video mode and the faster shutter fps/larger buffer. I swear my K200D only shoots about 3FPS on RAW and the buffer fills up after 5 frames. I haven't taken a lot of videos but it there's nothing wrong that I can see. The mic is awful though - if you want to record any sound get an external one, with the on-board one you will hear the camera pretty loudly.
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2010 10:00 |
|
|
Kazy posted:So I'm thinking of upgrading to a K7 this summer. I'm currently a K200D user. The main reasons for this are for the video mode and the faster shutter fps/larger buffer. I swear my K200D only shoots about 3FPS on RAW and the buffer fills up after 5 frames. My only gripe about the video is that it's manual focus only while recording, which is enough of a pain in the rear end for me not to use it at all. You'll love everything else about the K7 however - from the (much) faster fps & larger buffer to its awesome ergonomics and it's advanced feature set. The 2nd dial also makes a world of difference, and after a while you'll wonder how you ever got by without it.
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2010 11:55 |
|
|
fireman2a posted:The 2nd dial also makes a world of difference, and after a while you'll wonder how you ever got by without it. I moved from a *ist D (which had the second dial) to the K200D. The second dial was probably the thing I missed the most. Does the video at least have the AF-confirm? I have an external shotgun mic that I used for class, so camera noise isn't a problem for me. Good to know about the bigger buffer, the K200D stops after about 3 frames shot in RAW mode.
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2010 15:43 |
|
|
My budget is utterly destroyed, but I'd like to have something to lust over. The Canon-ears gush about the 100-400mm lens(es) they can get, and from the pictures I've seen posted in various threads, those are indeed fine glass. Is there anything comparable for Pentax? I'm thinking autofocus, either some zoom that tops out around 400mm or a prime at 400mm, and decent F values. Presumably Pentax, Sigma, Tamron, or somebody makes a nice lens like that?
|
| # ? May 8, 2010 02:09 |
|
|
ExecuDork posted:My budget is utterly destroyed, but I'd like to have something to lust over. The Canon-ears gush about the 100-400mm lens(es) they can get, and from the pictures I've seen posted in various threads, those are indeed fine glass. Is there anything comparable for Pentax? I'm thinking autofocus, either some zoom that tops out around 400mm or a prime at 400mm, and decent F values. Presumably Pentax, Sigma, Tamron, or somebody makes a nice lens like that? Anything by Sigma or Tamron will be available in a bunch of different mounts. Sigma has the Bigma and the Bigmos (google the names), and Pentax has a 300mm f/4. What is your intended use?
|
| # ? May 8, 2010 03:02 |
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Anything by Sigma or Tamron will be available in a bunch of different mounts. Sigma has the Bigma and the Bigmos (google the names), and Pentax has a 300mm f/4. What is your intended use? My skill isn't up to the abilities of decent lenses, yet, but maybe next year... I just googled "Bigma" and "Bigmos". Very interesting indeed, thanks! A tripod is obviously a higher priority, along with just getting out there and shooting lots more. Last weekend, I took around 800 pictures (2/3 of birds). This weekend, it depends on the weather.
|
| # ? May 8, 2010 03:29 |
|
|
King Hotpants posted:A second expensive hobby? You think I only have two? Ha. Hahahahaha. Haha. ...after I started photography, suddenly that 10/22 I'd been wanting was dirt cheap.
|
| # ? May 11, 2010 20:52 |
|
|
Selling my K200D & Grip so I can upgrade to a K7. Does anyone recommend a good hot shoe flash? I have a Sigma 530 Super but I'm wanting a second one. Not sure if I should keep with Sigma or if there's a better one out there for the price.
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 05:04 |
|
|
I use the AF360FGZ, it's a pretty great and reliable. Heard mixed things about the 540, though it does have swivel *also wireless, which is great
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 07:22 |
|
|
Me too. But if you ever want to shoot portrait with flash, skip the 360 and get something with swivel. Unless you're into the whole strobist off-camera thing then the point is moot.
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 11:17 |
|
|
sweat poteto posted:Me too. But if you ever want to shoot portrait with flash, skip the 360 and get something with swivel. Unless you're into the whole strobist off-camera thing then the point is moot. My current flash is a Sigma 530 Super with swivel, and this second one is just going to supplement off-camera work, so I think I'll be going for the 360.
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 11:22 |
|
|
Hey you crazy dogs, I made a buying post in SAmart for someones beloved ME Super. If you have one collecting dust and would like to help me out check out my thread! http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...hreadid=3306707
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 22:57 |
|
|
So I just pulled the trigger on a K-7 and this third party grip. From the reviews it seems to be a phantom shift type grip, everything seems to be the exact same as the original except weather sealing.
|
| # ? May 21, 2010 21:20 |
|
|
good choice, i moved up from a K10D and it's seriously made a world of difference
|
| # ? May 22, 2010 04:36 |
|
|
High res samples from the 645D are posted here: http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/...um/645d/ex.html
|
| # ? May 25, 2010 23:31 |
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:High res samples from the 645D are posted here: Mmmmm, that's delicious. Despite the fact that I will never get my hands on one I'm very excited about the 645D. EDIT: Not sure if there was any post done to those, but the last one was shot at 800 ISO and there's almost no noticeable noise. Moist von Lipwig fucked around with this message at May 26, 2010 around 00:55 |
| # ? May 26, 2010 00:32 |
|
|
Oh, to select a new lens. In 2007 I bought a K100D with a pair of kit lenses. The little Pentax has been very good to me, even though I managed to drop the telephoto in a Colorado lake (a button-related accident). As such, I've been running around with just my 18-55 wide. Being an English teacher in Korea, my budget is less than stellar. I want something flexible and lightweight, suited to my ranging about Asia. I've got my eye on this guy: Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Zoom Lens Beyond its outrageously long name, the lens bills itself to be "the world's lightest, most compact 11.1x digital zoom lens" — sounds quite fetching. Plus, Amazon has the list price of $645 knocked down to $290, $230 after rebate. Before I pull the trigger, I'd like to consult with you, the Pentax-enthused. Any experiences with Tamron? Will this lens work well with my over-achieving K100D?
|
| # ? May 30, 2010 14:34 |
|
|
drinkingthesun posted:Oh, to select a new lens. In 2007 I bought a K100D with a pair of kit lenses. The little Pentax has been very good to me, even though I managed to drop the telephoto in a Colorado lake (a button-related accident). As such, I've been running around with just my 18-55 wide. Being an English teacher in Korea, my budget is less than stellar. I want something flexible and lightweight, suited to my ranging about Asia. I've got my eye on this guy: The image quality will not be all that hot, probably worse than your kit lens. Super-zooms (covering a wide to telephoto range) tend to have huge optical compromises involved in their designs. I would encourage you to figure out what focal lengths you like and buy a prime or a zoom lens that covers a narrow range. Here is a review of that lens on another system (they say not to compare it like that but I don't see why it would be different). Zoom lenses are much harder to design and they're only starting to catch up to faster, cheaper primes within the last 10 years or so, and mostly in the pro end. For example, the Canon 24-105mm f/4L is probably indistinguishable from a prime, but it's $1000. I disagree with  here - yes, of course the best lens is the one you can afford and will use, but if you just want superzoom and don't care about image quality there's bridge cameras and point and shoots and the kit lenses aren't bad (narrow focal range makes it easier). It's fairly easy to cover everything with a few zooms (12-24mm for wide/landscapes, 18-55ish for normal stuff, 70-300mm for telephoto), and the quality will be much, much, much better. If you can stand to crop your images (or to back up if needed), a 15mm DA, a 35mm fullsize, and the 50mm fullsize will cover you pretty well in most situations with much more resolution than the kit lens or that superzoom. In the end I bet you will be happier with a cheap pro-level something than a higher-end consumer-level something, and it's better to save and buy one nice thing than buy a bunch of lenses that are cheap but disappointing. If you have friends or a camera store try borrowing, renting (can be done online), or playing with one in a store.Prime wide crop-sensor designs are rare unfortunately - if you can swing $500 (after rebate) for a prime, the Pentax DA 15mm f/4 looks like the best option here. For zooms, you have the Pentax DA 12-24mm wide zoom or the Sigma 10-20mm, or if you're thinking cheap, the Tamron 10-24mm. The typical suggestions here aren't available for the Pentax mount unfortunately. If you like telephoto the 50mm is always a good buy. The Tamron 70-300mm Apo Zoom performs way out of its price class ($200). Note that covering a large focal range within the telephoto category is much easier than covering a wide-to-telephoto range. In short I would look at the Pentax DA 15mm first or the Pentax DA 12-24mm if you want wider, or the Tamron 70-300 if you want telephoto, and keep your kit lens for the rest. If you haven't got a 50mm f/1.8 prime yet, those are the best value for your money in any system. e: Also look for used lenses. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at May 30, 2010 around 18:45 |
| # ? May 30, 2010 18:24 |
|
|
Seconding the "look for used lenses". Low- and mid-range glass seems to depreciate fairly quickly; your kit lens, for example, costs about $250 around here (Canada) brand new, but I've got one I bought second-hand off ebay for about $75, including shipping. As long as the mechanisms aren't damaged and there's no problems with the glass (fungus, scratches in the coating, etc), it's fine. It's not like passing many photons through a lens is going to wear it out. Dropping it, letting a 4-year-old play with it, yes, but general, normal use doesn't seem to harm a lens. In my experience. I bought a K10D a little over a month ago. I've got 3 lenses for it, all from different ebay sellers. My Sigma F4-5.6 100-300mm is my current long glass, and it seems to work well enough. It was previously mounted on a K100D, which was being sold separately at the time. I paid just over $100 including shipping, though it wasn't too far away and shipping was pretty cheap. I don't know what things are like in Korea, but I'd be surprised if such a lens was not readily available for cheap. I've never seen anyone else here talk about a lens like mine, the Tamron 70-300mm seems to be much more popular, costs about the same or only slightly more, and gets very positive reviews. 300mm on a crop body like your K100D is equivalent to about 450mm on a 35mm film camera, which is good enough for birds and (outdoor) sports, generally. The gap between your kit lens' 55mm and the bottom of a telephoto zoom, either 70mm or 100mm or whatever, isn't something that most people would particularly miss. It's the range from "a bit magnified" to "a bit more magnified". If you find yourself wanting to cover that range on a regular basis (again, unlikely), you should be able to find either a Tamron 28-80mm or a Pentax 35-80mm (or something from Sigma in that range, or some weirdo Tokina) for less than $100. I have the Pentax 35-80, I really only use it when I'm shooting from the driver's seat (parked, of course) and I don't want to get out into the rain / cold / snow / traffic to get into a better position. Plus, mine has a 49mm diameter, which fits the old goofy filters I bought for my old film SLR years ago, so I can play with those, and the lens body is silver, so I get to look cool. Listen to Paul MaudDib regarding the wider side of your search. I know basically nothing about wide angle lenses, but that Pentax 15mm is drat sexy, too bad it's still so new it's not showing up on ebay, and goes new for $700. Maybe in a couple of years... 
|
| # ? May 30, 2010 19:27 |
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:If you haven't got a 50mm f/1.8 prime yet, those are the best value for your money in any system. These don't really exist in AF for Pentax. Lowest I've seen was the FA 50mm 1.7, for around $250 used. However, that's not much less than the 1.4. PentaxForum's Marketplace is a great place to find good deals on used Pentax gear usually. In other news, my Tamron 17-50 is on the fritz with my K-7. Other lenses work fine, but the Tamron lights up the MF indicator for a fraction of a second which kills the AF-Point Selection. I just tested it on my K200D that I'm still trying to sell, and it does the same thing. It might have been doing it for a while, but I only just noticed since the K200D's AF selection is dedicated unlike the K-7's. I wonder how much out of warranty costs from Tamron 
|
| # ? May 30, 2010 19:29 |
|
|
For a first dSLR if I can get a new K-m for $160 less than a new K-x and I don't need video is there any reason I should consider the K-x?
|
| # ? May 31, 2010 14:56 |
|
|
Kazy posted:These don't really exist in AF for Pentax. Lowest I've seen was the FA 50mm 1.7, for around $250 used. However, that's not much less than the 1.4. Out of curiosity, what range is your serial number? I just bought (and returned) 2 Tamron 17-50s, both front focused by about 20-25mm at a distance of about a foot. Each had low SNs (both in the 00034x). Did your 17-50 work fine until now? Destroyenator posted:For a first dSLR if I can get a new K-m for $160 less than a new K-x and I don't need video is there any reason I should consider the K-x? K-x is regarded to have the best budget (and even medium range) sensor, of all camera brands, with terrific low light performance. That's about it.
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2010 19:40 |
|
|
KOFT posted:K-x is regarded to have the best budget (and even medium range) sensor, of all camera brands, with terrific low light performance. That's about it.
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2010 20:02 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Eh, what? I guess I didn't check out dxo mark, but pretty much every review I've read of the k-x concludes that it has class leading high iso performance that rivals even that of more expensive APSC cameras. In the end, if its your first camera you probably won't notice the high iso difference between the KX, KM, D3/5000 or T1/2i.
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2010 21:06 |
|
|
KOFT posted:Out of curiosity, what range is your serial number? I just bought (and returned) 2 Tamron 17-50s, both front focused by about 20-25mm at a distance of about a foot. Each had low SNs (both in the 00034x). Did your 17-50 work fine until now? It's in the 45x range I think. Made in Japan, which I hear is better than the Taiwan kind? Honestly I don't think they made more than 1000 of them in this mount. It focuses fine, but it got weird all of a sudden.
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2010 21:27 |
|
|
KOFT posted:In the end, if its your first camera you probably won't notice the high iso difference between the KX, KM, D3/5000 or T1/2i.
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2010 21:45 |
|
|
So this is a bit of a cross-post from the Olympus thread.
MY GIRLFRIEND is looking to buy a digital SLR. Of the major manufacturers, I've always been a Canon/Pentax person -- I learned everything on a Spotmatic and used that as my primary camera for years until the first Digital Rebel came out. I now shoot exclusively with old M42 Takumars on a 5D2, woot. My girlfriend says that she wants to be able to use my lenses, and since M42 adapters don't exist for Sony or Nikon, those two systems are out. So, I'm looking at Canon, Pentax and Olympus. Her price range is around $500, which puts the choice somewhere in this ballpark: XS/T1i E-450/E-520 K-x Of those, the K-x is the most intriguing. Everything I've looked at about it sounds better than I'd expected -- in-body IS, live view and a video mode, and apparently class-leading high ISO performance, which would be awesome because girlfriend is really tired of her point-and-shoot making everything dim look like it was printed on sandpaper. Aside from the wonkiness of the K-x running on AAs, it seems really attractive. So...what's everyone's opinion on it? How are things like the viewfinder image and quality of the kit lens? The huge number of K-mount lenses that will still meter and maybe even AF properly is a great benefit, but the kit lens will probably be girlfriend's primary lens for a while unless I buy her some more.
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2010 08:49 |
|
|
orange lime posted:
The K-x is missing a few features, though, like a top-of-camera LCD, in-viewfinder AF selection points, and the inability to have a battery grip. Other than that, it's a fine camera, but for most people, those things are dealbreakers. In other news, I sent my Tamron 17-50 out for repair. Let's hope they don't charge me too much to repair it. 
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2010 09:01 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 09:13 |
|
|
Kazy posted:The K-x is missing a few features, though, like a top-of-camera LCD, in-viewfinder AF selection points, and the inability to have a battery grip. Other than that, it's a fine camera, but for most people, those things are dealbreakers. So...do any of the entry-level cameras have top LCDs any more? I know the Rebels and E-series don't. It doesn't seem to be that big of a handicap, really. I also don't think that the battery grip thing would be a dealbreaker for my girlfriend at all. The lack of in-viewfinder point selection is interesting. Does that mean it doesn't even have AF points in the finder, or just that you can't highlight them while you're looking through? orange lime fucked around with this message at Jun 10, 2010 around 09:53 |
| # ? Jun 10, 2010 09:41 |
|
