Menu
What's new
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

jonoslack

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Woody
I'm sorry to hear about your back - I really hope things are getting better.

The 100 WR is pretty sharp - the spider was hand held, and is a crop, the only downside is the noisy focusing motor and the lack of a limit switch.

The 200 looks great, but it doesn't focus very close, and experience tells me that telephotos which won't do close up shots don't get used much.

Thanks Jorgen - doing good with the E5?
 
scho

scho

Well-known member
jonoslack said:
Hi There
Carl - love the blow dry - I've been thinking of that lens as it's so small.

Here are some shots from the last day or so

here are two with the 35 macro:

and a couple with the 100 WR macro
Click to expand...
Thanks Jono. The 55-300 is very good at 300 and with the K5 SR and good high ISO performance handheld shooting is easy.

Your macro shots with both the 35 and 100 are excellent. The 100 WR is number one on my acquisition list, after I sell off some other lenses.
 
W

woodyspedden

New member
jonoslack said:
Hi Woody
I'm sorry to hear about your back - I really hope things are getting better.

The 100 WR is pretty sharp - the spider was hand held, and is a crop, the only downside is the noisy focusing motor and the lack of a limit switch.

The 200 looks great, but it doesn't focus very close, and experience tells me that telephotos which won't do close up shots don't get used much.

Thanks Jorgen - doing good with the E5?
Click to expand...
Jono

Of course you are correct about the close focus capability of the 200. What I needed was a lens that allowed me to shoot my grandsons playing soccer. I could certainly have chosen a different long lens but 200 was kind of my minimum focal length and the IQ that I saw from the 200 was compelling.

So I'll try to post some soccer shots from next weekend when I can get out with my guys so all can see what it will do for sport shooting.

woody
 
B

benroy

Subscriber Member
Jono and Woody: regarding the close-focusing ability of the 200...it does focus down to a bit less than 4 feet. That doesn't make it a macro lens, but allows images of blossoms that are about the same size (or smaller) than the 200 lens cap. Here are some examples:

Roy Benson
 
Last edited:
B

benroy

Subscriber Member
Jono and Woody: more on close focusing with the Pentax 200. These head shots from a Japanese statue in the garden: head size: about 6" vertically...
shot wide open at ISO 400...handheld. Start at 6' (first pic) and then move into 4' and bob and weave around the head, focusing on the near eye. Focuses close enough?

Roy Benson
 
Last edited:
scho

scho

Well-known member
Whats' this - accident, drowning? Heck no just the gallery at the annual little yellow rubber ducky race in Cascadilla Creek and the fabulous compost fair (not kidding) next to the creek at Cooperative Extension.



First while waiting for the race to start a visit to the compost fair.

The Compost Doctor



A little composting music to keep the crowd happy.



Grooving on the compost music.



The race is on and the resident mallard decides he's seen enough.



So what's new with You Joe?



Duckies are coming on strong now.



Nearing the finish.



Finish Line - and the winner is! (serious stuff here).
 
jonoslack

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Carl
Looks like you had a lot of fun!
Our compost is not photographable :ROTFL:

Hi Ben
Thanks for the close ups - but it really only confirms my feelings - not close enough.

The 60-250 does considerably better (even if it's not fab at 250, it's fine at 200).

On the other hand, here are a few shots from the 35 macro -








 
JMaher

JMaher

New member
Jono,

Love the 35 shots. I keep thinking about the 31 and the other two (f2 and 2.4) 35 choices and then you post more great shots from the macro.

Jim
 
markwon

markwon

Member
Roy--beautiful colors in your first set
Jono--very nice macros, great atmosphere
Jim--very artistic shot, like the simplicity

Well, when my sale of the 16-50 fell through, I decided to give another run. It's proving to be my go to lens on K5, while the FAs hardly get a touch. I can't help but grab my M8 when I want to work with small primes. Not sure what kind of future my FAs have in my tool kit.

Here is a casual snapshot with the 16-50 and a novice attempt at using the 10-17 FE in the second.
 
Last edited:
jonoslack

jonoslack

Active member
markwon said:
Well, when my sale of the 16-50 fell through, I decided to give another run. It's proving to be my go to lens on K5, while the FAs hardly get a touch. I can't help but grab my M8 when I want to work with small primes. Not sure what kind of future my FAs have in my tool kit.
Click to expand...
HI Mark
I think my problems with the 16-50 were trying to use it for landscape and close up - I'm sure that it's excellent for portrait and candid, and I think it'd be great for wedding as well.

Like you - if I want small primes, then I'll use Leica, the K5 (for me) is for use with zooms / macros / telephotos - basically the bits I can't do with the Leica.

all the best
 
scho

scho

Well-known member
jonoslack said:
Hi Carl
Looks like you had a lot of fun!
Our compost is not photographable :ROTFL:

On the other hand, here are a few shots from the 35 macro -
Click to expand...
Hi Jono,

Yes, it was a fun afternoon and the compost here wasn't photo worthy either :D Nice macro work with the 35.

Couple from a walk on the waterfront today with the 18-135.

"Bleeding eyes red" door entrance to our summer theatre.



Flagpole

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top