|
Some rear end in a top hat stole all my stuff so I'm starting over. Currently eyeing up a K7 + Pentax 15mm f/4 and Sigma 30mm f/1.4 kit. I still have a 70mm f/2.4 for the tele. Any better options? Going for low size and weight so big ultrawide zooms are out.
|
| # ¿ Sep 2, 2009 18:29 |
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 23, 2013 17:56 |
|
|
Man, this new economy sucks. I remember seeing those Zenitars on ebay for about $110 NIB from the supplier. Oh well. I tried a K7+30mm on the weekend and I'm sold. Going to flog most of my remaining lenses and get that pair plus the DA 15mm f/4 for a 15mm, 30mm, 70mm kit. And maybe an old Pentax-A 24mm f/2.8 just for fun.
|
| # ¿ Sep 8, 2009 08:13 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:You'd think after all this I'd regret going Pentax for digital since the lens selection is so much better on Canon, but I literally love handling and using my K10 so much that I'm willing to keep at it. sweat poteto fucked around with this message at Sep 9, 2009 around 22:31 |
| # ¿ Sep 8, 2009 13:51 |
|
|
|
| # ¿ Sep 9, 2009 21:40 |
|
|
CanuckBassist posted:What about Canon's 24/2.8 or 24/1.4 and 100/2.8 or 100/2.0 on full frame, considering that Pentax is still crop-only?
|
| # ¿ Sep 10, 2009 07:08 |
|
|
Kazy posted:I don't really see the difference from the K-7.  If the specs are accurate it's definitely the K-m replacement. Pentamirror, cropped viewfinder, single dial, scene modes, AA batteries etc. Nice bump in drive mode and 24 fps (hah) 720p video. Let's see if they can keep the price sane. sweat poteto fucked around with this message at Sep 16, 2009 around 23:11 |
| # ¿ Sep 16, 2009 22:56 |
|
|
Looks like an awesome entry level body to me. It stacks up very nicely next to the competition. The lack of AF point indication is pretty weird though. WTF?
|
| # ¿ Sep 17, 2009 19:15 |
|
|
The K200D is the midrange model though, this is the entry-level one. The K-m wasn't sealed either. Everyone wonders what Pentax are up to. They have a niche - small APS-C bodies with fine prime lenses. It's probably not as lucrative a market as Canon and Nikon's professional line but it's a market not served by those giants so I'm fine with it. People who really want a big impressive camera with f/2.8 zoom lenses and no compromise image quality are probably better off with C/N/S. Personally I'd rather they focus on producing cameras like this and the K-7 and bring out more lenses than burn money copying the bigger, uglier competition.
|
| # ¿ Sep 18, 2009 09:22 |
|
|
What made you pick a Pentax kit in the first place? As I said above, I think if you want to use big fast zooms, Canon or Nikon is a better place to be right now. The sensors are simply better - which goes a long way to making up for lack of SR - and the support infrastructure is lightyears ahead. I know all about buyers remorse. I bought my kit two weeks before Pentax announced they were discontinuing ALL FA lenses. That was a kick in the nuts. But I like lenses they do have now, so I'll buy back in while I can. I do wish they had more wide-normal primes - and some more affordable lenses.
|
| # ¿ Sep 20, 2009 16:16 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:At 28mm SR's going to be marginally useful at best, since it only buys you shutter time below what you'd need to freeze action decently.
|
| # ¿ Sep 20, 2009 19:56 |
|
|
Pretty much any old 90mm f/2.8 or 105mm f/2.8 (or f/2.5) will make you happy. Heaps on ebay. You'll want a decent off-camera flash to drive it though.
|
| # ¿ Oct 2, 2009 21:54 |
|
|
Aw cute, a Canon troll  Anyway, if video's your bag, it seems the Panasonic GH1 is the place to be.
|
| # ¿ Oct 6, 2009 14:11 |
|
|
Serious question: what's "alt glass"? I just had most of my gear stolen so I'm starting again. I have a mid-range budget, looked at the options, and bought a new Pentax K-7, Pentax 15mm f/4 Limited and Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX. I'm keeping the 70mm f/2.4 Limited and selling the few other lenses that weren't taken. It's not really even a question of value - no one else makes this kind of gear. SR is good for at least two stops and lower than that isn't super useful at the wide end where I shoot. Noise is at least as good as the competition (eg D300, D50) in a smaller package for less money. What else is there to say? As I may have mentioned before if you want long fast lenses and big f/2.8 zooms you have several good options these days. For me, Canon and Nikon aren't delivering.
|
| # ¿ Oct 6, 2009 19:40 |
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:How's that [K7] working out for you? Do you have any gripes about it compared to your old body (whatever that was)? My old body was a *ist DS. The K7 is pretty much an improvement in every single area so not a lot to complain about. It's a bit heavier and slightly larger and doesn't take AA batteries ( ). On the plus side, shooting 2 stops below the 1/fl rule is awesome, the digital level and orientation sensor are great and it's ability to focus in the dark is pretty amazing too. Image quality is much improved also. The DS went blotchy around ISO800 whereas the K7 noise is still quite fine grained at ISO 1600. And being able to tweak shutter, aperture and ISO without changing the mode dial is quite a revelation.I've been busy since I got it so have only had a few chances to go out shooting yet. I'm pretty confident it'll cope with everything I already shoot while pushing the envelope on what I'm able to shoot. Can't ask for much more than that.  Two pics from the day I bought it:  ISO 100 f/1.4 1/15s 30mm (7pm, low light)  ISO 100 f/3.5 1/250s 30mm (1pm, shade) sweat poteto fucked around with this message at Oct 9, 2009 around 07:50 |
| # ¿ Oct 8, 2009 12:47 |
|
|
Here's what I ended up with: I think this will see me through the next few years at least. The body with any of those lenses mounted fits inside a Zing neoprene case for day-to-day, or the whole kit fits in a small Domke bag for travelling. Very happy
|
| # ¿ Nov 1, 2009 11:40 |
|
|
Kazy posted:What lenses are those? I recognize the DA Limited 70mm, but I can't tell which the other one is or the one on the camera. I highly recommend those Zing bags. I had one that was stolen with my old camera and I immediately bought a new one for the new camera. You're much more likely to take the camera with you when you go out if you can just toss it into whatever bag you're already wearing. Consequently you take more photos. sweat poteto fucked around with this message at Nov 2, 2009 around 09:07 |
| # ¿ Nov 2, 2009 09:03 |
|
|
I haven't tried the Sigma but I had the Tamron with those specs. It was heaps of fun.
|
| # ¿ Dec 20, 2009 15:56 |
|
|
Kazy posted:I am kicking myself constantly for not getting the FA50 at that price I think I paid about $230 incl NY tax at B&H 5 years ago, so those prices don't sound so bad. I thought prices had risen more than that. They made a FA35. Last I heard they stopped manufacturing the FA lenses some years ago, all the stock you see is coming from warehouses. One reason being lead used in the glass during manufacturing not meeting current EU regulations. Another being that Pentax are banking on APS-C and have shifted most (all?) their manufacturing to lenses for that format. NotShadowStar posted:What would be some good recommendations for a couple lenses for this thing, old or new? I'm pretty sure I need a good quality general purpose 18-55 to start. I don't think the kit lens is "junk" (though I haven't used it myself). If you're shooting on a tripod be sure to stop down - put it in Av mode and roll the dial down to f/8 or so. People frequently boast their lens is "tack sharp wide open" but ALL lenses perform better stopped down. Manual focus if need be. If you're really concerned print out a focus test chart and post some pics. If you still want to replace the lens there's the new DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 or DA 17-70mm f/4 or even the old 16-45mm f/4. On paper I'd go for the 17-70 for a walkabout. Good range, light and fast enough most of the time.
|
| # ¿ Jan 11, 2010 10:12 |
|
I've seen it used for anywhere from $200-$300 but I'm not sure if it is worth the upper part of that price range.
|
That's not a great test because the lights are emitting, making them about a trillion times brighter relative to the rest of the scene and blowing the exposure (clipping). Every camera will blow the lights in that scene without massive compensation. In very low light indoors you'll just need a faster lens. f/2 at least, f/1.4 if you can swing it. If it's proper dark you'll be manual focusing so picking up an old Pentax-A 50/1.4 for cheap isn't a bad idea. They MF much nicer than the autofocus models (F50, FA50, etc).
|
| # ¿ Jan 11, 2010 23:58 |
|
|
I'd take the K100D - sure the sensor has lower resolution than the K10D but it also has lower noise, it's cheaper and most importantly it's much lighter. I like my K7 but I miss the low weight of my old DS. Upgrade to a Kx in a year or so when it's cheap. Pentax used to have nice inexpensive primes, now it has nice expensive primes. I wouldn't say it's the cheapest system to get into these days but you do get some unique glass you can't get elsewhere (see top of this page). Sullik posted:For some reason I'm really drawn to Pentax.
|
| # ¿ Jan 17, 2010 01:11 |
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The pancake primes are cool but it's a bit dumb to buy a whole system for a pancake prime. I dearly wish they'd release them in EOS/Nikon/Alpha mounts, but they're the only leverage Pentax has. I don't have any of the "pancake" primes though the ones I do have are relatively compact. You're dead wrong about it being the only leverage. For many people it's a sweet spot of features like built-in SR and WR, lenses, price and ergonomics. Not everyone drives the same car - even in the same price bracket. evil_bunnY posted:The only thing the big 2 don't do is cheap+fast+wide. My three favourite things
|
| # ¿ Jan 18, 2010 23:18 |
|
|
Well now it depends just what kind of wide you're talking about. There are plenty of options in the 15-25mm (35m-e) range which most would call ultra-wide (10-20mm zoom, 14 and 15mm primes, etc). However if you want to go below 15mm-e then yeah, you need a full frame 35mm sensor with a matching lens. Below 15mm-e is quite a niche though. VV sorry, edited. VV sweat poteto fucked around with this message at Jan 19, 2010 around 14:12 |
| # ¿ Jan 19, 2010 10:25 |
|
|
If you ever shoot portrait, be sure to get a swivel head. The 360fgz drives me nuts sometimes.
|
| # ¿ Jan 21, 2010 12:36 |
|
|
Here's a mini-review: it's a f/1.4 lens in half the size of the kit lens. It has a short throw so it focuses fast and with a wide aperture you've got a fair chance of getting the shot with good exposure. If I was going out at night and didn't want to use flash the FA50 is the only lens I would take. It's an excellent lens for the money.
|
| # ¿ Mar 2, 2010 23:12 |
|
|
I wish Pentax would bring out an APS-C mirrorless body with K mount. The bulk of the K7 (compared to my old DS) is a killer. Micro 4/3 calls to me.. but I love my K lenses.
|
| # ¿ Mar 5, 2010 09:30 |
|
|
Yeah I know it has to be that deep. But it could still be much smaller than the SLR and weigh far less without the prism and mirror assembly.
|
| # ¿ Mar 5, 2010 11:39 |
|
|
The size is OK, but the weight gets to me. A mirrorless body could be under 500g I reckon.
|
| # ¿ Mar 6, 2010 21:42 |
|
|
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.
|
| # ¿ Mar 20, 2010 13:38 |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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 |
|
|
Sounds pretty cheap. That's less than the cost of a decent point n shoot here, and it's way better. The DS is a fun camera to start with. It's simple enough that you can get to know it inside out so every single function is second nature and you know the quirks and behavior so shooting is completely intuitive. Which is a good thing.
|
| # ¿ Jul 15, 2010 17:17 |
|
|
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/r...essage=35954094 "Hoya plans to release a mirrorless camera under Pentax brand that is distinct from models already on the market." D'oh! I just sold all my Pentax gear and picked up a micro four thirds camera last week.
|
| # ¿ Aug 6, 2010 09:43 |
|
|
mediaphage posted:Maybe. I guess I'm probably just a lovely photographer or something, but I've been pretty happy with my K-m for basically since it came out. I know I chafe sometimes, but it's definitely a usable thing. I used a DS for about five years before switching up to the K7 and while the it is a better camera in every way there's something nice about knowing a camera inside out. You know every function (because there aren't very many) and just how it behaves in different situations. I never really had that same feeling for the K7. I suspect this is just par for the course these days - dSLRs are much more capable now and there's a steep learning curve that goes with it.
|
| # ¿ Aug 24, 2010 11:01 |
|
|
Correct. Pentax kinda do whatever the gently caress they want. They're betting on APS-C sized sensors and corresponding high quality low bulk cameras and lenses to match. Some folks like that some don't.
|
| # ¿ Sep 8, 2010 19:07 |
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 23, 2013 17:56 |
|
|
Which is what People have been clamouring for ever since the KX got tested.
|
| # ¿ Sep 21, 2010 06:37 |
|
