The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

Fun with the Pentax K5

benroy

Subscriber Member
Bart: have had the 200 for quite awhile...before you came onto the thread...made several postings...then stepped aside when your 200 images began appearing...made for nice change of topics (from flowers to birds, etc.). Heckuva lens, isn't it? And then the 300/4.5 lens found me.

Roy Benson
 
Last edited:

Armanius

New member
Thanks Bart and Jim! I'll give it a try again, this time at higher apertures.

Most of the photos were actually at a good distance from the camera. Well, I guess it depends on what short distance and far distance mean. For example, the photos of my girlfriend (the Asian girl) were all at least ten feet away. Those photos were all cropped and then shrunk to 1200 pixels. Actually, all but the last two photos were cropped and then shrunk.
 

raist3d

Well-known member
Jono, Woody, Bart, Michael, Roy... and others..

Thanks for the kind words about the Faded Roses... I have been saving those damn roses for almost two months now waiting for the opportunity to shoot them.
I really think this shot is phenomenal. It just has the color/light and texture that is really nice to look at.

- Raist
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi There
Jim - nice shot of the lady - but I find the sign on the left of the shot a little distracting.
Armando - I love the girl at the beginning - and the grumpy looking guy . . and of course your girlfriend as well
Tom - pretty in pink!

Here's one from the morning walk:



and here's one from after the morning walk!


7am and Sam's having a rest - Sam has come to stay with us on a long term basis, he's lovely, friendly and doesn't seem to mind my pretty ghastly riding skills :eek:



all with the 18-135
 

neilvan

Well-known member
Came across this Black Bear on a long drive on Tuesday...just south of Whistler, BC.

Shot with my K-5 and 100mm f2.8 WR from about 15-20 feet away (while sitting in my car ;) ).



And these two with the same lens in Mt. Currie (45 minutes north of Whistler).



 

Paratom

Well-known member
I have to say goodbye to this thread.
I did another comparison with the K5 vs D700 after I had again quite a few out of focus images at medium distance yesterday with the K5.
I guess I had bad luck with my 2 samples of the K5 or with my lenses.
I just cant get reliable focus with it. Loved the small lenses, the robust body, the colors. But I need a reliable tool. Maybe it just needs further fine calibration but I am tired of fine calibration.
So anybody interested in a K5 or 15,21,35,70 50-135mm let me know.
 

tsjanik

Well-known member
I have to say goodbye to this thread.
I did another comparison with the K5 vs D700 after I had again quite a few out of focus images at medium distance yesterday with the K5.
I guess I had bad luck with my 2 samples of the K5 or with my lenses.
I just cant get reliable focus with it. Loved the small lenses, the robust body, the colors. But I need a reliable tool. Maybe it just needs further fine calibration but I am tired of fine calibration.
So anybody interested in a K5 or 15,21,35,70 50-135mm let me know.
Sorry to hear this and somewhat surprised. I have followed this thread, largely because it has some great photos, but also because I'm considering a K5. I have a 645D and have found the autofocus to be very accurate (within a few inches at medium distance). To my knowledge, this is the same system used in the K5.
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
I have to say goodbye to this thread.
I did another comparison with the K5 vs D700 after I had again quite a few out of focus images at medium distance yesterday with the K5.
I guess I had bad luck with my 2 samples of the K5 or with my lenses.
I just cant get reliable focus with it. Loved the small lenses, the robust body, the colors. But I need a reliable tool. Maybe it just needs further fine calibration but I am tired of fine calibration.
So anybody interested in a K5 or 15,21,35,70 50-135mm let me know.
Tom,

15,21,35 and probably 70 are difficult to focus at medium distance reliably...maybe the 50-135 at 110+ but even then if it is not a fast lens you will struggle.

I do not have a K5...never will but you have a number of great shots from it. I am reminded of Ansel Adams .... said if he had 10 exceptional captures a YEAR he was happy. In the process is the joy .... results are secondary. Do you exercise your vision with the small camera or your back with the big camera.

Even if you sell your system don't say goodbye...there are too many wonderful captures here not to visit and encourage others....

However, I do imagine if you had a 100 WR or a 200 for a week your success with the camera would encourage you.

Just an observation......


Take good care,

Best Regards,

Bob
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Bob,
you are right - I should not say goodbye, just that I will probably not be able to post images -but of course I will come here and look for the great images.
Why do you think that those lenses are difficult to focus at medium distance?
I also have to say that I had same kind of problems once when I had a Canon 7d for some time.
If I didnt have the experience from various Nikon dodies I had over time I might live with it, or further work to isolate the reasons and work on those, but I am just not patient enough any more. But each time when I go out and shoot and later many images are slightly off focus I am frustrated.
Also if I did not have a Leica M system as well I might keep the K5 for its small size and further experiment.
I also know there are others who do not have such problem with the K5 system. And as I said the color and tonality I like a lot.
I was close to get 1 or 2 more lenses, (either a 200 or a 60-250 and eventually a 100WR but I just dont feel safe to spend further money if I am not sure if I will manage to get the system under control)

Tom,

15,21,35 and probably 70 are difficult to focus at medium distance reliably...maybe the 50-135 at 110+ but even then if it is not a fast lens you will struggle.

I do not have a K5...never will but you have a number of great shots from it. I am reminded of Ansel Adams .... said if he had 10 exceptional captures a YEAR he was happy. In the process is the joy .... results are secondary. Do you exercise your vision with the small camera or your back with the big camera.

Even if you sell your system don't say goodbye...there are too many wonderful captures here not to visit and encourage others....

However, I do imagine if you had a 100 WR or a 200 for a week your success with the camera would encourage you.

Just an observation......


Take good care,

Best Regards,

Bob
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Bob,

Why do you think that those lenses are difficult to focus at medium distance?
Personally, I have found that with small viewfinders and my aging vision - even with corrective lenses I cannot nail focus consistently with those wide angle lenses. With the better view afforded by a full frame viewfinder I am much more likely to nail the framing and focus as there is more of a contrast shift visible to decide what is best. Even though medium wide lenses have a bit more apparent depth of field ... the zone of critical sharpness is still not that deep. You have found the problem with the K5 and the 7D both with smaller viewfinders.

I know this is true from my use of Leica and VC lenses on m4/3 cameras...I will set an apparently correct focus through the viewfinder only to discover when I move to magnified live view I am OFF A BIT. So my compensation now is to live with live view when it matters. Many subjects are moving too quickly for this to work which is where my Nikon D3s excels....great AF and a wonderful viewfinder.

With macro or a lens like the 200 your viewfinder sight gives a much better view of that which you wish to be in focus...so your capture rate is higher. I am totally amazed at the sharpness and color and beauty from the pics with the K5 and the 100 WR or the 200.

If the K5 has a decent live view function you might test its magnified view as an assist with the lenses you have mentioned. Personally if I had the camera it just might be permanently welded to a 200.

Bob
 

JMaher

New member
Tom,

Sorry to see you go. I still struggle with the K5. It has so many positive things going for it but it lacks others. I shot with the K5 for a few hours yesterday than switched to the 5D2 that was in my trunk for a 1/2 hour or so. I like the larger view from the Canon and the ability to tether but the size and adjust ability of the K5 is great. I think I got more keepers from the K5 based on the ease of changing focus points compared to the 2 button awkward approach in the Canon. I need to remind myself that there is no perfect camera.

Jim
 

MalcolmP

New member
Jono,the boots shot feels very mediterranean:thumbup:
Neil,any shot with a bear in it is a winner for me:)(nothing so exiting here)
Rich,particually like the second image:thumbup:the more i look at it the more i'm sure i can see the grass and crops bristling in the breeze.(perhaps i need a new monitor:loco:):ROTFL:
Tom,"confidence is king" and if the k5 gave you reason for doubt,then youve gotta do whats best for you:salute:
A shot from a while ago.Henrhyd Falls,Wales, with the humble 18-55 kit lens. I dont think its much of a shot but I do think it hints at,to me anyway,the tonal/DR range of the k5 even with a dodgy lens!...(flat light,iffy subject matter,ropey clot on the lens :ROTFL:)
Regards
Malc
 
Last edited:

Paratom

Well-known member
Personally, I have found that with small viewfinders and my aging vision - even with corrective lenses I cannot nail focus consistently with those wide angle lenses. With the better view afforded by a full frame viewfinder I am much more likely to nail the framing and focus as there is more of a contrast shift visible to decide what is best. Even though medium wide lenses have a bit more apparent depth of field ... the zone of critical sharpness is still not that deep. You have found the problem with the K5 and the 7D both with smaller viewfinders.

I know this is true from my use of Leica and VC lenses on m4/3 cameras...I will set an apparently correct focus through the viewfinder only to discover when I move to magnified live view I am OFF A BIT. So my compensation now is to live with live view when it matters. Many subjects are moving too quickly for this to work which is where my Nikon D3s excels....great AF and a wonderful viewfinder.

With macro or a lens like the 200 your viewfinder sight gives a much better view of that which you wish to be in focus...so your capture rate is higher. I am totally amazed at the sharpness and color and beauty from the pics with the K5 and the 100 WR or the 200.

If the K5 has a decent live view function you might test its magnified view as an assist with the lenses you have mentioned. Personally if I had the camera it just might be permanently welded to a 200.

Bob
Bob,
I agree with the viewfinder thing - and I also guess that with a larger sensor the AF-Sensor in relation to the viewfinder is smaller so easier for selective focus.

The other thing is that for some reason I feel there is some relationship between sensor size and how the transition between the sharp and unsharp planes look like.

I can not use a 100 or 200 as my main lens since I like shorter focal lengths for many things.

Tom
 
Top