Jump to content

dlegaspi

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    507

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by dlegaspi

    16-35 Vs. 14-24 Vs. 17-35 (review)

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p><em>I'd rather that they deliver true rectilinear performance and charge more for the product.</em><br>

    <em>For zooms, IMO i'm fine with little distortion. just like Shun, I'd take corner sharpness over slight</em> distortion on any lens...if you wan't absolutely straight lines, you're going to have to go for PC/TS lenses...<br>

    lens designs have progressed significantly over the years; not too long ago, I was a zoom "snob" because most zooms cannot match equivalent primes. Not true today. Maybe someday, technology will allow lens designers to create sharp and truly distortion-free zoom lenses without having to cost too much.</p>

    K10D and M42 Lenses Experience

    in Pentax

    Posted

    <p>I hope my post isn't treated as a flame bait. Like I said, I was a bit surprised with these issues and I just wanted to ask the group for similar experience...especially regarding M and Av giving a different reading.

    </p>

     

    <p><strong>Well look at it like this...the focus points didn't exist on a

    manual focus camera that the M42s were designed for.

    </strong></p>

     

    <p>With Nikon cameras, you can still select focus points for focus confirmation...this is important for nailing focus for shallow DOF. Although you have a point (pun not intentional), I just found it weird that Pentax did/could not do what Nikon did for their old manual lenses for this feature.</p>

     

    <p><strong>also, the exposure problems seem uniform in each mode. So you now

    figured out the exposures just remember the EV settings. </strong></p>

    <p>

    I guess. It would have been easier if the over-exposure and/or underexposure is consistent. it behaves differently depending the set aperture. this renders the stop-down metering not very useful.</p>

    <p><strong>

    Can Pentax really be faulted for not making it's 2007 cameras fully

    functional with it's 35 year old lenses? In a perfect world yes,

    but in reality, it's just not practical to bend over backwards for

    used glass that you no longer sell.

    </strong>

    </p>

    <p><strong>To date every brand has switch or crippled it's mounts, Pentax

    seems to be the most committed to allowing backwards compatibility,

    even if there are some issues.</strong></p>

    <p>

    I would disagree on this to some extent. IMHO, Nikon provides a slightly better BC with their flagship cameras...stop-down metering actually works, (slightly) better focus confirmation (you can still select focus points even in MF)...plus you can program MF lenses in the camera so aperture will be recorded in the EXIF.<p>

    <p>

    --

    </p>

    <p>

    With all that said, I still think the K10D is a great camera and the SMC Takumars are reason enough to buy one!</p>

    K10D and M42 Lenses Experience

    in Pentax

    Posted

    <p>I just recently acquired a K10D (it's on SALE!!) and a couple of SMC Takumar

    M42 (Screw-mount) lenses (28/3.5 and 50/1.4). </p>

    <p>

    After setting the custom setting to allow Aperture ring to be moved (i.e., stop-

    down metering), I found a couple of interesting observations using the 50/1.4

    (I tested this with my Sekonic meter and my other camera, the D2X):</p>

     

    <ul>

    <li>In Av mode and wide apertures, the K10D will underexpose by at least a full

    stop (depends on subject). You actually need to dial at least +1 to get proper

    exposure. It gets weirder: when using M mode, pressing the "green button"

    (small button next to the shutter button) gives you a shutter speed that is

    more-or-less the correct exposure (sometimes still underexpose by about 1/3

    stop). </li>

    <li>In Av mode and small apertures (f8 and smaller)...it goes the opposite

    direction: it overexposes!</li>

    </ul>

     

    <p>Has anyone experienced the same issues?</p>

     

    <p>

    I love the camera and the lenses but it's a bit frustrating that Pentax didn't

    bother making the K10D fully-support manual lenses in the AE department. </p>

     

    <p>

    Also, it's a bit cumbersome that can't I use focus points other than the center

    for focus confirmation.</p>

     

    <p>BTW, I'm using the genuine Pentex M42/K adapter.</p>

     

    <p>Thanks.</p>

    <center>

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/subtleimages/2307938422/" title="IMGP0075-

    Edit by Subtle Images, on Flickr"><img

    src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2340/2307938422_d7755251dd.jpg" width="335"

    height="500" alt="IMGP0075-Edit" /></a>

    <p>28 Takumar SMC @ f3.5</p>

     

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/subtleimages/2310515906/"

    title="50SMCTakumar2 by Subtle Images, on Flickr"><img

    src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2209/2310515906_e58fd918bb.jpg" width="337"

    height="500" alt="50SMCTakumar2" /></a>

    <p>50 Takumar SMC @ f2</p>

    </center>

    Used Nikon D2X versus Nikon D300

    in Nikon

    Posted

    "I am afraid that it is not a good practice to make extensive comments on a camera that one hasn't seen/used."

     

    I'm guessing that is directed at me? With all due respect, I only comments about the D300's handling...based on specs is pretty much like the D200, so it's not inaccurate to say that the D2x is better in handling...well, again, that is my OPINION.

     

    As for the other new features, whether I've seen them personally or not, it wouldn't have affected my decision to choose the D2x. I still don't need them...but that does NOT mean those features are worthless. I know some of those features appeal to some or even most users, but they don't appeal to me...which was the point I was trying to make.

    Used Nikon D2X versus Nikon D300

    in Nikon

    Posted

    I am in the same boat as you are and I chose a used D2X.

     

    Bjorn hit the nail on the head: your decision should be based on features that are

    important TO YOU, and not what's important to everyone else.

     

    The new features like the the faster AF, higher ISO and Live View does not really appeal to

    me (although it's hard to ignore its sweet LCD display).

     

    I haven't held a D300 personally, but since this is pretty much a "newer" D200 (a camera I

    own for almost three years), I can attest that the handling of the D2X is heads-and-

    shoulders above the D200...especially with huge, heavy lenses like the 70-200VR. And

    HANDLING is very important to me.

     

    That said, just like buying anything used, one should be very careful buying a used D2X. I

    wouldn't touch Scott K.'s used D2Xs with a ten-foot pole since I know that it's been his

    workhorse. Fortunately these days, a huge percentage of high-end electronics owners are

    rich amateurs...and with patience you can find a used D2X that's well taken care of at the

    right price.

     

    As for warts? Well, the LCD's colors and angle of view is horrible (improved with the

    D2Xs)...and the AWB sucks in mixed lighting.

    Recommended Diffuser for 550 EX

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    <i>The Sto-Fen Omni-Bounce is terrible because it wastes a lot of light throwing it everywhere. </i>

    <br><br>

    uh...that's what Omni-Bounce does: throw light everywhere...and this scattering of light softens the shadows which somewhat contributes to its diffusing effect.

    vc 50/2.5 ?

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <i>I think poor US sales maybe due to Erwin putting the Whammy on this lens early in the piece scaring off potential Leica M users. </i>

    <br><br>

    if that's the case then it's a real shame...because anyone who buys lenses based on Erwin's "recommendation" is an idiot.

×
×
  • Create New...