julio_marcos

<p>The DxoMark 'combined' rating is a bit silly, really. For example, the Panasonic LX5 (which I have) and the Olympus XZ-1 scored 41 and 34 respectively, even though they use the same sensor! <br>

Once you look at the overlapping graphs you see why: the LX5 and XZ-1 are perfectly matched except that the LX5 also goes down to ISO 80 (vs. ISO 100 of the XZ-1), and that little additional dynamic range at that lowest ISO makes the big the difference in the final numerical summary.<br>

Same thing with the K5/D7000 sensors. They score hugely because of the ISO 100 performance (which is great), but don't tell me that the score of 82 means that overall they are as good as a Nikon D3s.</p>

<p>Fine, you can do tethering with the K10D and I think the *Ist D too (unlike my *Ist Ds), but my point is that for this environment the Pentax system might not put you in an advantageous position. This is not to say that you couldn't do it, it's just there are probably better tools out there. </p>

<p>If I were to do it I would ask myself these questions:<br>

-What are the obvious advantages of a Pentax system for the kind of <strong>paid shooting</strong> I'm planning to do?<br>

(I cannot think of an obvious reason right away, at least for this <strong>specific</strong> environment; other photographic situations would be very different, for example landscape, street photography, etc.)<br>

-vs. the obvious advantages of a Nikon/Canon (Sony?) system?<br>

I think there's many. For instance, being able to tether the camera to a laptop and having instant review on a large screen would seem to be a deal-breaker for me. </p>

<p>Although I switched from Pentax to Nikon (which is funny since I started with Nikon film cameras), the new K5 looks nice, so if the original poster wants to go for it, why not? Just make sure the lenses needed are there.<br>

<br /> Are things wonderful in the other side? Well, a lot has been said of the great pancakes, and yes they are small and very nicely made, but after enduring (for example) a Pentax DA 21mm f/3.2, at the end of the day you pay a high price for a slow lens that has quite a bit of distortion (considering that I was using it for a field of view close to the equivalent 35mm and not a wide angle). I would accept that for a fast lens, but really, a normal-wide? In contrast, I use the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 on a full frame body (I know, it vignettes a bit) yet it is amazingly sharp wide open, has a lot of pop, and even though it also does distort more than it should, for the super-low price I'm OK with having Lightroom 3 correct it automatically. And it autofocuses beautifully in continuous mode (AF-C)!<br>

<br /> My favorite Pentax primes were the old FA limiteds, the 43mm (lot of comma wide open at mid-long distances, but exceptional otherwise) and the 77mm which I kept (beautiful rendering, although it made the CCD sensor bloom a lot). So you are not getting Leica M or R lenses for cheap, but it should satisfy in many areas.<br>

<br /> My main problem with Pentax is that they dropped the optical assembly they had in Japan. Haven't kept-up to see if they changed course, but that made me lose a lot of confidence in the company; the premium products should be kept 'at home' where the expertise has been developed for years and the manufacturing is close to the heart of the design team.</p>

<p>Sigma 50mm f/1.4 for delightful images with creamy backgrounds (and fast autofocus) and the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 for more casual pictures with the rest of the family. The 35mm is a contrasty lens, balances the Sigma look. I does have some distortion, you can always use Lightroom 3 for auto lens correction.<br>

A macro lens is handy but not as useful as a fast portrait lens in my opinion (how many baby feet/hand pictures are you going to take?)<br>

Keeps RAWs around even if you don't use them now, you can always re-process them in the future (sometimes the advances in image quality outdo new camera generation sensors!)</p>

<p>From Thom Hogan's review of this lens:<br>

"<strong><em>Turn the camera off. </em></strong>Nikon's been telling us to turn the camera off before changing lenses, and it's never been more true. If VR is active when you remove the lens from the camera, weird things can and do happen." http://www.bythom.com/70300VRlens.htm</p>

<p>I got a 24-85 AF-S from KEH after all the recent praise but could not stand the amount of distortion on FX (it's there even at the telephoto end!). The Tamron 28-75mm is a much better lens (although I don't like the micro-motor focusing in the new version).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I've found my D700 over exposing on several circumstances... Often enought that I wondered if it was Apple Aperture's RAW converter rather than the camera. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I found the same thing after trying Nikon's NX2 just for kicks - the D700 raws, specially indoors, are very over-exposed in Apple's Aperture. The difference is brutal. Unfortunately NX2 is a pain to work with, so I tried Lightroom 2, and with its Camera Profiles I can now get an excellent output that matches the camera's internal Picture Control.</p>

<p>

 

<p>You cannot outsource your way out in core technology. You need to keep a tight, close-loop between R&D and manufacturing for the cutting edge products. Commodity items are OK to be manufactured elsewhere, but the idea of saving money by moving everything out of your local area of control and expertise will cost you dearly in the long run. Nikon, Canon, Zeiss make the high-end products locally. I was sad when I heard that Pentax was closing their lens plant a while ago - to me that's the beginning of the end.</p>

 

</p>

I did the same: *istDS and a DA40, plus the 16-45 for wide angles. The 35mm frame view is

my favorite, but I was surprised how much I got from the equivalent 60mm view of the DA40

when traveling. Now the DA40 is the default lens on the camera (but I'm excited about the

wider pancake mentioned in Pentax's roadmap).

I'm with Alan on this one; I find the digital workflow easy and fast, but I have invested lots of

hours developing it (reading books, websites, and practicing). I can get my RAWs to look

fantastic, with the 'pop' I was getting from my slides shot with Leica glass. On the other

hand, I've battled with my scanned slides to avoid blown highlights and restore the original

color (that's with a Nikon Coolscan scanner). The whole process is so time consuming it

wears me out.

Of course, if you stick to slides or prints then you don't have to worry about this.

Volfy,

If you like the idea of the Sigma 30mm f1.4, you might want to look into the 31mm f1.8

Limited. If you want the ultimate in portability, get the new DA 40mm f2.8 pancake (as I

did). It is incredibly small, light, sharp, and superbly built.

I skipped the kit lens when I got my DS and went for the $400 DA 16-45 zoom. I'm more

of a prime kind of guy, but this zoom does very well, gives me a traditional 24mm

equivalent view, and does not flare! It has some barrel distortion at the 16mm and tends

to underexpose on occasion, but this does not trouble me since I use RAW and Photoshop

(flaring would be bother me since it is hard to post process).

 

Probably a fantastic combo paired with the new DA 50-200 zoom.

Coming from a Leica M I found the ist DS very intuitive to use; the button layout is

minimalistic and well thought-out. I'm sure you can wait for the DL to come around,

but the viewfinder is going to be smaller, which for me is a no-no.

I'm actually not using my M6 anymore; probably will keep a minimum setup for B&W

slides.

Thanks for the answers. I did go to the rental store the day before to see what was available and how it handled. That was a good idea: no Rolleis available (they had been sold!), and the Mamiya 7 was rented out. I asked to see a Mamiya 645 and it scared me. I was finally able to get a Mamiya 7 from a different store. Impressions so far: the M7 was a great rental decision, since it is easy to handle. I still have to get the film processed, but so far all the overhead involved makes me appreciate the 35mm medium much more!

This weekend a friend of mine and I are going to try out MF by renting

some gear at Samy's camera. My idea was to get a Rollei 6008 for

myself, with two backs, one for color slides , the other for B&W. I

like travel/scenary and people photography, so I was thinking getting

a normal lens and a wide angle (like a 24mm in 35mm cameras). But

maybe I should I try something I could eventually afford. I am also

interested in being hand-holdable most of the time. Other options that

seem good are the Mamiya's 645 and M7 rangefinders. I am sure there's

no perfect answer but at least there should be something out there

easy and pleasurable to use. Thanks!

Thanks for the ideas. I figured out that for my height I would need a tripod like the Gitzo mountaineer 1228 or a Bogen 3021. But I'm still going with a small Gitzo (getting the 126) since I can put in my tankbag along with my FE2, 24m, 50-125 without much fuss. Later on I might get a full scale tripod - then I'll have to get a backpack like described above.

Not being experienced with tripods (a friend has lent me a 3001 with a

3030? pan+tilt) I was thinking about getting a Gitzo 106 (standard

tatalux) and a Kirk-modified Kaiser ballhead, to try to keep things

relatively light and small. I would use this on dayhikes and along

with my motorcycle.

 

First off, I believe this setup is ~45cm folded

(34cm + 10cm, or 18 inches total) by looking at the specs of each. Is

it going to end up more than this? (folded center-post not included in

Gitzo's folded leg specs??). Also, can I remove the center post with

ballhead so that I have the legs (34cm) as the longest folded element?

 

 

Other experience I do not have are with issues like flexibility (is

the 126 - performance tatalux with 2 angle settings worth it?) and

back-problems (I'm 6'1, I'll probably have to bend on my knees to use

this setup without extending the center column much). Maybe these

questions are too personal, but the most input I get the better.

Trying to get this in a week or two and start practicing for the

summer. Thanks.