andrewg_ny

<p>The * and Limited both represent the best of Pentax, but the lines reflect different philosophies. The * are generally fast and weather-sealed and DA* all offer in-lens motors but also trend larger and heavier. The Limited models prioritize classic metal build quality and compact size ahead of outright max aperture but both offer the best of Pentax optics for a given package. The longest limited lens is the 77, though the 100/2.8 WR macro is limited-like in terms of construction even if not named this way. The only limited zoom is the DA 20-40/2.8-4, which also happens to be the only limited lens offering weather sealing and in-lens motor (DC, in this case).</p> <p>The DA* 60-250/4 is definitely a step up from a Sigma 70-300, though the Pentax 55-300 is pretty good too, and costs quite a bit less and is considerably smaller & lighter. While the 60-250 is a good bit lighter than a 70-200/2.8 would be, its size & weight remain a consideration whenever I am deciding what to bring on a given outing. I have some of the shorter limited lenses as well, they're great too but there is no telezoom designated 'limited'.</p> <p>It is somewhat interesting that the newly announced full-frame D-FA 24-70/2.8 was not designated with a *. Possibly this is related to the rumors that this lens is a modified Tamron design.</p>

<p>Tim, we can always count on you to critique color! Javier did claim to give them a saturation boost in LR. Not sure whether he shot in raw or JPEG. Javier's blues look pretty electric to me, and the skin tends a bit pink/magenta. These look like vintage Javier to me both in terms of subject matter and punchy color treatment, similar to what he would have produced from his older Pentax bodies. </p> <p>I will contribute that when I process Pentax RAW (from various models up to my latest K5ii) in LR with very similar tweaks to yours (very mild boost to saturation & black level, slightly larger clarity boost) I have always gotten relatively natural looking colors & tones something like the image you post. I find WB generally pretty good, I usually don't feel the need to tweak it more than one click one way or the other. </p> <p>Of course I don't live in SoCal, so don't generally have the kind of intense sunlight & clear skies that Javier experiences on a routine basis.</p> <p>For better or worse, newer DA lenses tend to be a bit contrastier than your F-zoom. I'm not sure which in-camera JPEG profile you were using with your K100D...I think 'Bright' might be the default? When I've shot JPEGs in Pentax bodies, I've usually used the 'natural' preset -- I figure it's more effective & flexible to boost saturation or contrast to taste later if necessary rather than try and remove it if overdone in-camera. I seem to remember that K100D JPEGS were praised relative to the models that came before (like my 1st, the *ist DS2), though I think the criticisms with the older models were maybe more about sharpening than the colors.</p>

I agree with Wayne: Javier, good to see you here again! I wouldn't get my hopes too high on the C.AF. The 18-135 isn't supposed to be all that bad but it's not a very big quality leap. There is a new (pricier and larger) 16-85 which should be better. Both offer relatively good DC in-lens AF motors while the 18-55 still uses the noisier in-body motor. The K-50's shutter is not as quiet as the one in the K-7/5/3 series but I guess since you've ordered it you'll find that out soon enough!

Halftrack in the yard: Awesome! John, It has been a while for me too but I think there might be a link to attach a photo while posting (on the 'success' page *after* 'confirming' your post) if you want the image hosted by photo.net. If you want to link your photo posted elsewhere (I've usually used Flickr) you can edit the post HTML and paste the anchor tag to embed the image.

<p>I picked up a K-5ii a little while back when they were on clearance. I have *ist DS2, K10D, K20D, K-7, and K-5ii. I have really liked all these cameras but probably none more than the K10D when it first appeared, especially after the firmware update that allowed ISO control from the 'OK' button. I like the grip and build quality on the K-7 and K-5ii a bit better but tend to agree that the size difference isn't completely for the better--I *thought* I wanted a body a bit smaller (but not quite as small as the DS2) but in practice it's nearly as big but the controls on the camera are just that little bit more cramped. Perhaps the slightly larger K3 is slightly better in this regard?<br> The K10D was leaps and bounds better than the DS2 in terms of controls, features, ergonomics and speed. I still think it has the best MF/AF switch of all these models. The K20D was a bit of a disappointment as it made few real improvements other than mild high ISO improvement (K10D was still pretty decent at 1600 but 3200 was poor; on the K20D and K-7, 3200 became something you might use if necessary).<br> Along with a more satisfying build quality, K-7 brought an actually usable live view with a higher res LCD and a slick quiet shutter, along with an improved grip, a couple of extra buttons and the 100% view pentaprism. It also improved the metering and white balance. Its slightly smaller size seemed a better match for small limited primes.<br> The K-5ii finally delivered a better sensor and noticeably improved AF for both live view and low light phase-detect. I can imagine that your experience with the even better K3 was similar. The taller lockable mode dial was also an improvement over the K-7 but this was a non-problem on the K10D/K20D -- the more cramped controls on the K-7 and K-5ii have made the mode dial as well as the AF point mode metering mode more difficult to use than on the K10D/K20D. It also still accepted the same D-BG4 grip as the K-7, which factored in my decision to upgrade.</p>

<p>Waist-level finder not a waste! First ringbox I've ever seen that's worth keeping.</p>

<p>If you're thinking of using this prime as a single walk-around lens to shoot with a simple & minimal kit, the 35 might be a little more comfortable and flexible than the 50. On the other hand, the 50 might be a better choice if you're looking to make tighter compositions with more subject-background isolation (throwing the background out of focus, etc.). The 50's main attraction is that it has generally the cheapest way to get a fast lens. Either one offers good optical quality so it comes down to how you're thinking of using it. This said, I think the DA50/1.8 and DA35/2.4 are both perfectly fine ways to introduce yourself to prime lenses.</p> <p>Those 'two' 50mm lenses have the same URL so I don't know what two lenses you might be referring to. </p> <p>The 135/2.5 Takumar is probably nothing 'special' and in addition to being manual focus, as a pre-'A' lens, will be a little less convenient to use, requiring stop-down metering. I should note that the price is reasonable but also not 'special', as it's similar at KEH and can be found for less elsewhere. As you note though, that's not a lot of money so it's easy to imagine extracting $60 worth of enjoyment out of it...and like the 50, that's as fast as you're going to get without a much more significant price tag. Some user reviews of this lens <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Takumar-135mm-F2.5-Bayonet-Lens.html">here</a>.</p>

<p>Christopher, what is that "4.5-60mm" lens? The photo posted looks more like its an f/5.6 lens from the aperture ring markings. I'm also guessing it's not really a 4.5-60mm zoom...is it a 60mm f/4.5 prime? And is it K-mount or M42?</p>

<p>I also change lenses freely and I have not found dust to be a significant bother. In the somewhat unlikely case that it is actually noticeable (generally the lens needs to be stopped down a bunch and the dust needs to be covering a part of the image where it will stand out (for example on a light-toned, evenly colored sky/wall/ceiling) it's usually relatively small and easily cloned away when post-processing.</p> <p>You mention "big dust line" in your description -- I much more frequently see small rounder dust bunnies, where when lens aperture is wide-ish its not especially well defined but it gets sharper when significantly stopped down. Can you share an image of this "big dust line"?</p> <p>I do not spend a lot of time worrying about this, and as far as 'sensor cleaning', it's usually just an occasional hit with a rocket blower like the one Matt mentioned.</p> <p>For what it's worth, I think I've tended to have Pentax's built-in dust removal shake enabled on camera power on or off (forget which, it's been a while). Maybe this has helped over the years?</p>

<p>The K-7 has a similar 14mp sensor to Mark's old K20D. Pretty much any of the newer bodies (with the 16, 20 or 24mp Sony sensors) have noticeably improved high-ISO performance and dynamic range.<br /> Brief summary of what you've missed:</p> <ul> <li>K-7 added a new, slightly more compact body than the K10D/K20D with 100% viewfinder, 77-segment metering, slick quiet shutter, and a few ergonomic tweaks, fully-functional but rather slow live view</li> <li>K-5 added the improved 16mp Sony sensor, improved live view with faster contrast-detect AF</li> <li>K-5II has somewhat improved low-light AF</li> <li>K-5IIs removed the anti-aliasing filter (increased resolution potential and increased probability of moire artifacts)</li> <li>K30 and K50 were essentially similar to the K-5 with slightly simplified ergonomics (still with dual e-dials), a downgraded shutter, no battery grip capability, and 12-bit rather than 14-bit RAW files.</li> <li>K-3 24mp sensor, dual SD slots, anti-aliasing filter simulator, 27 AF points, slightly larger body</li> <li>K-S2 is sort of a downgraded K-3 (again, ergonomics/shutter/grip/12-bit RAW) but has a newer 20mp sensor, built-in Wi-Fi and an articulating rear LCD screen.</li> <li>K-3II adds GPS, pixel shift resolution, improved 4.5 stops shake reduction, but removes built-in flash</li> </ul> <p>Other lower-spec bodies over the last few years:</p> <ul> <li>K-01 had capabilities similar to K30 but was live-view only (no viewfinder or phase-detect AF), and only single e-dial, no weatherproofing</li> <li>K500 is roughly a K50 without weather sealing</li> <li>K-S1 was released after (?) K-3, but with no weatherproofing, single-e-dial, 20mp sensor, 11 pt AF. It could also be considered like a K500 but with single e-dial but newer 20mp sensor in a smaller body. It and the K-01 are probably the smallest APS-C-sensored bodies that Pentax has released.</li> </ul> <p>If I were you I'd probably aim for anything K-5 or newer. If you want to buy new, the K50 is probably the cheapest new body still available (~$300 for body) and would be a good upgrade in most respects (except for battery grip support and a couple fewer dedicated controls like metering mode). If you want the nicer-constructed K-5 series body and its somewhat more advanced ergonomics & features, used examples of these probably won't cost much more than that.<br /> The K-S2 sounds like a pretty good fit for your described usage, and they have a new, more compact collapsible 18-50 kit zoom lens for it.</p> <p> </p>

<p>There is a 'Winder ME II Parts List' which includes some sort of wiring diagram on <a href="http://www.pentax-manuals.com/manuals/service/servicemanuals.htm">pentax-manuals.com service manuals</a>. It may be similar. If not, perhaps there are other documents there that might help.</p>

<p>I think it looks pretty good too. When it comes to weight, Pentax bodies sometimes weigh a bit more than competitors bodies, In addition to weather-sealing, I attribute this to in-body SR and AF motor, plus in some more recent examples, Pentax offers a brighter pentaprism rather than the competitors' pentamirror viewfinder. </p> <p>I think KSII might lack a portrait/battery grip so if you like that sort of improved handling for heavier lenses, that might be a factor that favors a K-3 or K-5-series body.</p> <p>I haven't handled the KSII yet but one annoyance I've found on the sub-K-3/5/7-series bodies is that ergnomics for adjusting ISO aren't nearly as good for changing ISO with viewfinder at eye-level. With K-3/5/7/10D/20D you could hit the ISO button and adjust manual ISO with an e-dial, or press the green button to enable auto-ISO. This could easily be done with the camera at eye-level. With more recent more entry-to-mid-level Pentax models (including K-01, Q-series, K30/50 etc.) the ISO button is on the 4-way controller, and once you press it, you then use up/down on the same 4-way controller to switch between auto and manual ISO. You don't really have good view of this operation in the viewfinder, so it forces you to use the rear LCD for this. IMO Pentax under-uses the green-button-for-auto/reset paradigm in their rear-LCD menus...there are a few places they could use it sensibly but neglected to. Another place that comes to mind is having green button reset drive mode to single frame.</p>

<p>No first-hand experience of course, but I'd think there'd be a benefit when using any lens -- should yield truer colors and fewer artifacts by recording all three color channels for each pixel rather than traditional bayer interpolation. It's probably true that artifact (such as moire) reduction would be more significant when images are at their sharpest with the better lenses at their best apertures.</p>

<p>I asked that question because<br> 1) in-lens motors required a firmware upgrade on K-10D (as Paul detailed)<br> 2) in-lens motors use additional lens mount contacts that don't affect other usage</p>

<p>Are these screw-driven lenses or in-lens motors (SDM/DC)?<br> <br />Do you have a battery grip attached? (conceivably this can have an impact on the effectiveness of body controls.)</p> <p> </p>

<p>The minimum focus <a href="http://www.us.ricoh-imaging.com/camera-lenses/HD_PENTAX-D_FA*_70-200mm_F2.8ED_DC_AW#!product-specs">is quoted</a> at 3.9' (1.2m) on the USA Ricoh site. That seems more reasonable...where did you see 2m, Jochen?</p> <p>Agree that if it's actually 2m that would be rather poor.</p>

<p>Some Pentax models had specific multi-exposure features, including the MZ-S, PZ-1p and ZX-L/MZ-6, probably more. The MZ-S has a nice position on the top panel drive mode switch just for this purpose. The earlier unmotorized models would also generally allow disengaging the film advance via the button on the baseplate. It might be worth checking whether these buttons (any make, not just Pentax) would be blocked by your tripod plate, this might be a potential nuisance if you're planning to use this feature.</p>

<p>Like other Pentax lenses, I imagine these will be significantly discounted a few times a year.<br> Prices are high but right in between Nikon and Canon for recently designed lenses.</p> <ul> <li>Nikon 80-400/4.5-5.6 $2,700, 70-200/2.8 $2,400</li> <li>Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6L II $2,200, 70-200/2.8L II $2,100</li> </ul> <p>Of course, Canon 70-200/2.8L (gen I, no IS) is only $1,350.</p>

<p>Uh-Oh...here we go again back into the SDM disaster vortex.</p>

<p>No personal experience with Tokina other than than I spent some time looking for one a few years ago and came up dry. Possibly availability is better now. <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3626353#forum-post-53138619">This thread</a> might be helpful.</p> <p>I will say that on a APS-C sensored DSLR (all Pentax models to date) that I've found the 50-60mm short end of the designed-for-digital lenses (DA 50-200, 55-300, 60-250) more friendly in use than 80mm short end like FA80-320 -- I would often find myself needing to switch lenses. Another consideration might be minimum focus distance...not sure what it is on the Tokina, but I would check and consider that too.</p>

<p>For what it's worth, I tried a AF-360FGZ on one of my MX bodies, it fired fine at 1/4, 1/60, and 1/1000.</p>

<p>New lenses are welcome, though IMO they should have released the 80-400 (100-400?) a long time ago. The collapsible and WR 18-50/4-5.6 DC seems like a good idea, hopefully it's at least as good as the existing 18-55 -- the addition of silent DC motor, WR and the extra-compact size are all welcome for a basic lens.</p> <p>Also, about time that Pentax/Ricoh offered an articulating rear LCD screen on a DSLR.</p>

<p>While it's not clear to me why Pentax has done this for flagship models (MZ-S had similar strap lugs), it doesn't cause me much trouble. The D-Rings can make noise, though the leather bits can quiet this. Maybe the D-Rings are considered more versatile? </p> <p>Not sure how you're holding it -- I think there's adequate clearance.</p><div></div>

<p>Appears to work for me. Set to Av, save user settings. Set to 'USER' and rear screen shows 'Av'. Tried this on a K-7 but imagine it would work on others. Which model are you trying to do this with?</p>

<p>One significant handling issue for me between the K50 and the K-5/7 series (as well as the earlier K10D/20D) is the ISO control -- the ability to effectively manage the ISO while the camera is at eye-level. With most of these cameras you can press or hold a button and either use a wheel to set ISO manually or hit the green button to re-engage auto-ISO.</p> <p>With the K50, you press the ISO button (which is one of the 4 directional buttons) and you get the ISO management screen on the rear LCD, much like on the K-01 or Q-series. You can still sort of manage it but you then need to use up/down buttons to switch between manual and auto ISO, etc -- not nearly as friendly for on-the-fly ISO changes.</p> <p>I'm not sure whether or not Pentax has ruined this on the K-3 or not. Pentax has made a few questionable usability decisions recently -- the other one that comes to mind is the change from the display/info button simply cycling through the different display modes to instead having the button show an annoying menu to pick which display. Not sure if they put this one on the K-3 or not, but they did this on the K-01 and I believe K30/50/500/S1 as well.</p>