celasun

<p>Another vote for the 55-300; perfect price/performance ratio.<br>

Absolutely no 'unexpected' shortcomings.</p>

<p>The site says:<br>

<em>The shorter dimension of each print may vary depending on the image proportions. If you need exact image dimensions for a certain size please contact...</em><br>

I believe the declared sizes are for the papers and not for the actual images.<em><br /></em></p>

<p>Live View showing black screen? Sounds like the camera needs servicing. A serious problem with the sensor is likely :(<br>

Still, there is no harm in trying to re-install the firmware or update it if it is an earlier one.</p>

<p>Thank you Charlie; most informative.</p>

 

Some people work physically harder than the others; out of necessity

or not. Anyone you know?<div></div>

Black Sea region, towards the Alpine areas.<div></div>

<p>>Q2<br>

DA 18-135mm looks good at least on paper. I would not hesitate to buy it if I were beginning to shoot with K100D Super nowadays.</p>

<p>>Q3<br>

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 is a good all around lens and it is better (in price/performance ratio, at least) than many others of roughly similar quality.</p>

<p>Finally:<br>

I like my DA 55-300mm very much even though I have some better lenses in that range. If you manage the wider focal lengths using second hand manual primes (Takumars and others) you may well end up with a quite a range without spending much.</p>

 

<p>I have learned a lot reading the responses. Joseph's detailed comment was especially enlightening.<br>

Almost all the other messages contained hints I found valuable.<br>

I have too much to learn :)<br>

Many thanks to all my friends...</p>

 

<p>Wait! The question may not be "that" stupid!<br>

I have three 55mm prime lenses for three different format cameras; 24x36, 645 and 6x7.<br>

I know one can design a lens of any focal length (within limits, of course) for any format. Although there seems to be an agreement between camera companies to supply 50mm, 100mm and 150mm lenses, any lens maker can design a 147mm lens, if needed. In fact, Pentax has 31mm, 43mm and 77mm lenses (all highly regarded) for the 24x36mm.<br>

Giving this degree of freedom, I just wonder why the "55mm", of all the other possible focal lengths, enjoys a special position. All three 55mm lenses are praised for their high optical quality. And none of mine is a poor performer, to say the least. Some 55mm lenses are even labeled as the best of all primes for that specific mount. The situation looks particularly odd as the "standard" lens for the 24x36mm is regarded as 50mm. There is, for example, no 45mm lens for that format AFAIK. Why design a 55mm (and not a 45 mm)?<br>

Perhaps, the focal length of 55m offers some advantage to the lens designer. Easier correction of some aberrations? Less problems with widely open apertures? A noticeably better bokeh? And, the optical explanation behind these advantage(s) might just be related to, say, the wave length spectrum of the visible light. As you might have guessed, I have no idea :)<br>

Do you think this is just a coincidence?</p>

 

<p>Bob,<br>

Thank you for the extra info you have provided. Both a good-looking AF280T and a PT-1D module for Sunpak are on their ways :)<br>

Keh.com has been a very dependable source for me for some of my MF lenses. However, the above were found elsewhere.<br>

I especially like the the Sunpak 333D because its manual settings (even more than those referred by Will for the modest Pentax AF200T above) are very useful. I will probably end up with more flashes than I actually need!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Bob,<br>

Many thanks for reporting your measurement results. I feel better :)<br>

In the meantime, I have found a a PT-1D module at the auction site. I understand that it does not offer any increased safety (electrically) but the possibility of TTL metering for the flash looks like a plus (until mastering the manual use).<br>

Ikka,<br>

Thanks for bringing the AF280T to attention.<br>

I wonder which of the two (Sunpak 333D and Pentax AF280T) has a higher guide number. They look rather similar at first sight.</p>

<p>Bob,<br>

It is a YC-1D (for Contax). I have been using this on an optical trigger. Perhaps I should continue using it that way.</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses :)<br>

I'll be trying the Sigma ASAP.<br>

My Sunpak is "Auto Zoom 333 D Thyristor". It has 3 contacts.</p>

 

<p>I have both Pentax 645N and 67.<br>

I also have a Sigma 530 DG (TTL for Pentax DSLRs) and a Sunpak (fully manual) flash.<br>

I wonder if I can use them with my MFs without risking anything.<br>

Any advice is appreciated.</p>

<p>I have a 50-135mm "star" with failed and later fixed (paid) SDM. (It is optically wonderful, though). It is probably the last Pentax lens you would consider buying used, even from a friend. Or, be prepared to pay some more for the "fix".</p>

<p>I am happy with my Pentax 645N; not 6x6 but easily hand holdable with intuitive controls and a dependable meter.</p>

I liked Anders Hingel's image most among the ones submitted until now.

And, here is mine:<div></div>

<p>Pentacon Six, Vega 120mm f/2.8 (at f/5.6), Fujicolor ISO 100 negative film (past its best before day). Scanned, converted into B&W.</p><div></div>

Carved into stone. North-West coast of Turkey.<div></div>

<p>K20D, Sigma 17-50mm. Today!</p><div></div>

<p>I had such a "stain" on my very first DSLR (a K100D). I did not realize that this was a big problem at the beginning, as I was a novice as far as DSLRs were concerned, and had tried to clean it (using a wet kit). I had never succeeded. Then, I had examined the sensor surface using a stereomicroscope and discovered that the dirt (or whatever) was not on the sensor surface; it was under it. To be precise, it was under the "protective" layer. In the meantime, my cleaning attempts caused more problems on the sensor surface. The local Pentax service agreed with my diagnosis and the camera was sent to Germany. They had just ignored the dust "within" the sensor and claimed the sensor was damaged by the user (which was correct, but...). I got my camera back. Obviously, my capabilities are still well below the level where I can put dust particles underneath the very first layer of the sensor!<br>

In short; I suggest you should never try to clean the sensor of a new DSLR. The potential damage that could be caused by your attempt can nullify the possibility of a replacement.</p>

 

<p>I would just like to mention Sigma 70mm f/2,8 EX DC Macro. No idea about its price. I find it easier to use and a bit more versatile than Vivitar Series 1 105mm f/2,8 macro lens. I am not sure which is sharper ;)</p>

<p>I suggest -while you are waiting- downloading the same file using another computer or terminal.<br>

It is most likely that your operating system or your browser is faulty.</p>

<p>Kiev60 with Vega 120mm lens. On Fujifilm Superia ISO 100 with a process before date of 04/2007. Scanner: Epson V500. Software: Vuescan.</p><div></div>

<p>Congratulations :)<br>

I have just seen (and admired) your photos here and I am happy that a member of our community published a book.</p>

<p> </p>