Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Thanks Martin.Guilty, I have one.
I don't think that my copy of the 16-50 is all that sharp. Pentax will adjust if necessary.
However, I used the camera and a 17-70 f 4 last summer in W. China with really good results. This lens is great, and the K7 is "weather sealed."
Pentax takes a lot of heat for noisy sensors, and not so great AF. Maybe not as noise free as some others. They have a philosophy about making digital images resemble film images. As such, they do not use a lot of NR. But there images do not have that plastic look of over processing. I use Pentax RAW with very good results. I find the AF is fine. In low light it hunts like everyone else.
I used it in the Gobi desert, and no problems, or dust on the sensor. I have some of the Limited primes, and they are quite good but slow. The 35mm macro is really nice. I'm thinking about the 15mm Limited. Unfortunately, none of the modern lenses have aperture rings, so not much good on a m 4/3, or NEX.
Martin
The DA Limiteds all have relatively small maximum apertures - 15/4, 21/3.2, 35/2.8, 40/2.8, 70/2.4.when you say the limited primes are 'slow' do you mean slow to focus?
Hi OrenThe DA Limiteds all have relatively small maximum apertures - 15/4, 21/3.2, 35/2.8, 40/2.8, 70/2.4.
Yes, that's already on my Pentax K20D. Can't recollect the exact number of memory places, but I think it's quite a few. Not sure though which lenses have a "code" that the body recognizes (in addition to the current Pentax lenses).Incidentally, can you adjust focus for specific lenses on the body (very useful on the A900).
Thank youYes, that's already on my Pentax K20D. Can't recollect the exact number of memory places, but I think it's quite a few. Not sure though which lenses have a "code" that the body recognizes (in addition to the current Pentax lenses).
No, I just think that we Pentax owners are aware that our cameras are not perfect. But some of the lenses are so good that we are prepared to put up with the little issues that some of the followers of the other major camera makers like to often remind us about. I especially enjoy the full-frame (FA) limited lenses that I can also use on a 35mm film body.Thank you
...............
Nobody sounds very positive. Am I missing something?
Well, I see Pentax as a compromise brand. Often a great compromise between properties. The brand is rarely at the bleeding edge, but rather brings good bang-for-buck products to the market a bit later than the big players. They have particularily concentrated on compact size and weather sealing (higher end Pentax bodies, DA* and WR lenses) and ruggedness. Where the brand has been lacking is the speed and low light ability of AF. Also, high ISO is nothing to write home about. On the other hand, Pentax uses less noise filtering than many other brands. Also, the lens line is a bit limited (no pun intended) and according to the rumors, the SDM AF motors in some lenses have a higher breaking rate. Also, many would like to have an upgrading path in the form of a FF camera body.Nobody sounds very positive. Am imissing something?
Thanks ChrisCongratulations! I look forward to your report on the 100 Macro.
Erm Yer Well - if it's still around you can - but a little brick wall testing has shown a decentred 16-50, the 100 macro is lovely, but it hunts a bit, and the files are great, but not as great as the M9 or the A900 (obvious, but telling). I have until Friday to decide whether to keep it.ooh, Jono! i want to play with it!
you're allowed to return it.Erm Yer Well - if it's still around you can - but a little brick wall testing has shown a decentred 16-50, the 100 macro is lovely, but it hunts a bit, and the files are great, but not as great as the M9 or the A900 (obvious, but telling). I have until Friday to decide whether to keep it.
The Nikon one doesn't hunt (100 VR), but maybe all the others do, the Sony certainly does.you're allowed to return it.
i was briefly seduced by the waterproof mention and then i looked up how much it was... sigh. too rich for my blood, even if it was the cat's meow. (i'm still waiting to hear how much my M8 repair will be -- which is slightly worrisome...)
as for the macro hunting -- don't they all?
Yes, I think you're right - the 'bonus' of auto focus is overshadowed by the experience of the rangefinder, and the quality of the Leica lenses, and the fact that the Leica files are really a great deal nicer than those from the K7 (sad though).Jono,
I suspect that one reasons for your problems with the K7 is that you own a Leica. If you didn't use a rangefinder, you would have bought the Pentax with Limited lenses, like the 15, 43, 70 or something similar. A different user experience, but you probably don't need that, since you have that experience, and more too, in the M9.
Well, maybe, the big Zeiss zooms on the A900 seem to be pretty okay (and the 70-300 G lens, but 70-300's are obviously an easy lens).I've been skeptical to the Pentax/Tokina 16-50 all along (which is one of the reasons I use a Tamron), and you confirm my suspicion. Nowadays, all nice normal-range zooms seem to be big monsters (the Tamron isn't perfect either, and I'm about to give it up). I seriously consider using primes only for anything but work/sports.