andrewg_ny

<p>Are you saying even the built-in flash has a significant delay? That seems odd. I don't suppose redeye-reduction flash mode is in use? That causes a significant pop-then-delay before capture.</p>

<p>In terms of build, feature set, and image quality the top-of-the-line Pentax has generally been competitive with models such as the ones you list. The D300 is actually a bit dated now, the K-5IIs is probably better in some regards (newer sensor).</p> <p>If I had particular needs as a professional I might not pick Pentax -- in addition to the oft-criticized continous/tracking autofocus, there are aspects to the flash system that might push me elsewhere -- the top Pentax models offer 1/180 X-sync while many competitors offer 1/250, plus there is better third-party support for Nikon and Canon flash systems. This is not a humongous difference (only 1/2 stop), but if flash is a priority then it might matter to you.</p> <p>Also, If I was the sort of pro that needed speedier access to rent or repair gear, I might consider Canon or Nikon a better bet there too.</p> <p>This said, for general-purpose, Pentax still has plenty to offer. I imagine Pentax might not be able to offer that slick, quiet shutter at 1/250 X-sync?</p> <p>This is mostly nitpicking though..the camera bodies and other Pentax gear are pretty good, and most of the people posting here have chosen them for themselves for one reason or another, and probably consider themselves the main limitation, not the gear. Is there a particular aspect you're interested in?</p>

<p>Nice set, Dorus.</p> <p>As usual, very interesting processing, a lot to be proud of here. I don't know if the halos around the spherical tank in #5 could have been avoided?</p>

<blockquote> <p>"From Pentax brochures I am recalling that the programs for full auto exposure became more ill ballanced in the later models like P50 or SFX."</p> </blockquote> <p>None of this matters if you're using Aperture-priority AE (only affects full Program AE) but...</p> <p>The P5/P50 and SF1/X offered multiple program AE lines -- you could select a line that would favor fast shutter/wide aperture/shallow depth-of-field/action or increased depth-of-field/narrow aperture/slow shutter.</p> <p>P5/P50 has two: Program Action and Program Depth.</p> <p>SF1/X offers three -- Action, Depth, and Normal. Furthermore, with Pentax-F (AF) lenses, SF1/X could vary the program based on lens focal length. Neither the A or P series bodies could do this since the Pentax-A lenses don't report focal length to the body.</p> <p>Of course, none of this matters if you're using Aperture-priority AE rather than full Program AE.<br> <br />I believe the P3's single-line Program AE favored faster shutter speeds than the Super Program; I believe this was considered more novice-friendly to reduce camera shake. The line is similar to the 'Program Action' line on the P5/P50. An example (looking at the chart in the manual), it would shoot ~1/250 at f/4, while a depth program would stop down more quickly, maybe something close to 1/60 f/8 in similar light.</p>

<p>I own a copy or have used most of these.</p> <p>I like the P3n, and the P5 is decent too. The P5 uses pushbuttons for shutter speed but unlike P3, offers exposure compensation. Note P3 is also known as P30 and P5 as P50, and there are some minor variations (n, t).<br> <br />Drawbacks of P3 or P5 -- 1/1000 shutter rather than the 1/2000 you get on the Super A, and no TTL flash.<br> You also lose shutter-priority automation and you have no indication as to what aperture is being chosen when shooting full Program AE. In fact, like the ME/ME Super, there's no viewfinder display of aperture at all.</p> <p>P5 can use the Super A's 'Motor Drive A', but the P3 cannot.</p> <p>More on TTL flash. The only manual focus (pre autofocus) Pentax bodies to offer TTL flash were the Super A (aka Super Program) and the LX. So if you're accustomed to using the TTL mode on your AF280T (a pretty good flash unit), you won't get that level of automation with other models; you'll be stuck with full manual flash, or 'auto' flash that uses the little flash sensor built into the face of the flash unit. You should still get some 'dedicated' features such as showing 'flash ready' signal in the viewfinder, automatically setting shutter speed to X-Sync, automatically setting aperture when using aperture setting 'A' on a full Program AE-capable body such as P3 or P5.</p> <p>Incidentally, the Super A's downscale cousin Program A (aka Program Plus) has the ergonomics of the Super A but a feature set more like a P5 (except for the 'ML', aka AE-lock, which P series includes but Program Plus/Super Program/Super A do not).</p> <p>If you like small size and light weight but are not especially sensitive to smaller viewfinders or lack of split-prism screen focusing aid (though it may be possible to retrofit that) you might also consider an AF body like a ZX-5n/MZ-5n. Many of these offer TTL flash, and all offer built-in film advance motorization. There's also a ZX-M/MZ-M which is very similar but intended for manual focus (has split-prism screen, no AF motor), unfortunately drops the TTL flash support though. These also have somewhat more modern metering -- instead of center-weighted, they offer segmented (matrix) metering.</p> <p>In addition to Chinon there are also other K-mount bodies from Ricoh (should work with Pentax-M lenses (and with Pentax-A but no Program AE or Shutter-priority AE). I believe there are also newer Cosina-built bodies branded as Vivitar or Promaster that accept K-mount glass.</p> <p>The LX is nice but much more expensive to purchase. Generally feels like a better-crafted, more solid machine in the hand, has a better viewfinder, supports TTL flash, offers 1/2000 shutter. A little bit larger and heavier than ME or Super A -- closer in size to a K1000 or KX, but lighter and more compact than a Nikon F-series. One of its relatively unique strengths is long exposures -- it continues to meter off the film DURING a long autoexposure and will end the exposure when it believes it's received enough light, somewhat like how classic TTL flash works (though that stops the flash rather than closing the shutter). Few cameras do this, though I believe Olympus may have had something at least somewhat similar.</p>

<p>Good to hear, Wayne!</p>

<p>The GZII flashes are weather-resistant and offer built-in continous LED lighting for video. I don't believe Metz is offering these.</p> <p>You'd want to confirm this as Duane is suggesting otherwise but I believe the Metz 52 AF-1, 58 AF-1, and 58 AF-2 can function as wireless P-TTL master/controller as well as slave. Some of the earlier mid-level or lower Metz flashes could only function as slaves. If wireless P-TTL was important, I would probably favor Pentax OEM flashes for better compatibility. For example I have read that due to Metz firmware issues, the 58 flashes could not function as wireless controllers with HSS (high-speed sync, sync at shutter speeds faster than 1/180 x-sync).</p> <p>You might want to take look at <a href="http://pttl.mattdm.org/">Matt Miller's P-TTL flash pages</a>; for the last few years he's been maintaining this site with info on available P-TTL flashes.</p>

<blockquote> <p><em>"When you say you haven't found the Pentax to be at all unusual in this regard compared to any other autofocus SLR then you must not have used any comparable Canon."</em></p> </blockquote> <p>Wayne, everyone here is just trying to help. While I've spent less time with other brands, I've tried them enough to know the <em>expected</em> behavior is the same. I imagine you've also observed this with the very similar (non-nightmare?) K-5 that you didn't mention you own until a later post.</p> <blockquote> <p><em>"Now that this is solved, you may all go back to more constructive tasks, like photographing brick walls. I sincerely do thank one and all, your suggestions were all correct."</em></p> </blockquote> <p>With the 'brick wall' comment, I have no idea whether you're being sincere or not. Either way, I wish you better luck with your K-5IIs repair or replacement.</p> <p>For what it's worth, I was able to correct this sort of problem on the film *ist 35mm body with a shot of contact cleaner into the shutter button mechanism but a) this may be less effective on a sealed body and b) one might be more reluctant to try this fix on a body that is still as valuable as a K-5IIs.</p>

<p>In the wild I have seen a comparable number of Olympus 4/3 SLR bodies to Pentax; that is to say, several a year but a small fraction vs Canon or Nikon, and somewhat fewer than Sony. Maybe in recent years I'm finally seeing more Pentax than Olympus E-series (and these aren't generally high-end like E-1, E-3, etc. more like E-410).</p> <p>As far as popularity and prices, I think the price hikes over the past couple of years have already pushed Pentax much closer to competitors than they were when I first started accumulating Pentax gear in 2006.</p> <p>I don't think the average photographer has an especially low opinion of Pentax gear, they are mostly so ignorant of it that they don't recognize it, or maybe even know it exists.</p>

<p>Wayne, I understand your frustration but I haven't found Pentax to be at all unusual in this regard compared to any other autofocus SLR, nor the K-5ii to be any different than other Pentax models -- the half-press generally just works. I am suspecting you might have a hardware issue with your shutter button, possibly the half-press is dodgy. I did have a problem somewhat like this with a Pentax film SLR. Suggest you see if you have the same problem when using the AF button on the back of the camera instead of the shutter half-press. You can even disable the half-press via setting. See if keeping the AF button depressed plus AF.S keeps your focus locked.<br> <br />Since we're thinking about a possible hardware issue with the button, if you have a battery grip you might consider removing it, or alternatively experiment to see if the problem goes away when you use the secondary shutter button.</p>

<p>I think the LEDs also count down during self-timer. A little gimmicky but maybe not 100% useless.</p> <p>We don't know quite what output a K-S1 will yield because it's the first Pentax with the 20mp sensor. I think it's reasonable to guess it will be in the same ballpark as the good 16 and 24mp sensors though. </p> <p>As for cheaper than a K3, I think a K-5II or K-5IIs makes a fine upgrade to a K20D. As would a K50, though I'm not sure its AF is quite as good as the K-5II. </p> <p>You don't lose too much from a K20D with a K50 or K-S1...will probably have 12- rather than 14-bit RAW, and you'll lose a few dedicated controls. </p> <p>Ergonomically the one that's probably most noticeable is that the ISO button for the K10D/K20D/K-7/K-5/K-5II/K-3 is better designed for control with the camera at eye level; you can control manual ISO with e-dial and revert to auto with the green button. The K50 and K500 (and most likely probably the K-S1 as well, not sure about the K30) have ISO control more like the K-01 and Q, where the ISO button on the 4-way directional buttons is designed for adjusting on the rear LCD, where once in ISO mode you switch between auto and manual ISO using up & down d-pad buttons. You <strong><em>can</em></strong> change manual ISO at eye level but it's harder because the auto vs. manual ISO switch isn't done with green button, it's done with up/down instead.</p>

<p>I would hope they don't discontinue K50, I'd think there's room for both models. I'm thinking this is sort of a K-01 successor, possibly will co-exist with a K50 replacement that won't appear until next year?</p> <p>The K50 offers sealing and dual e-dials. Also has a AA battery option for those who like this. The K500 has pretty much the same less the sealing and IIRC the viewfinder AF point illumination?</p> <p>The K-S1 appears well-equipped and while the LEDs on the grip seem likely to be a continuing source of internet ridicule it keeps the 100% pentaprism, very good for an entry level body. The numerous color options are mostly pretty attractive, unlike many of the options on previous custom-color Pentax cameras where 2/3 of them would be intolerable to most people. </p> <p>K-S1 looks pretty small, smaller than the K-50. Not sure yet whether it matches the tiny Canon Rebel XS1 but I can imagine that this may have been a design goal, to minimize the size (in the Pentax tradition). An unsurprising result is relatively short battery life, and (unique for a Pentax DSLR) the SD card is in the same compartment as the battery.</p> <p>The minimal size (for a K-mount body) and the emphasis on style (at some ergonomic cost) makes this feel a bit like a K-01 successor. The rear (illuminated) mode dial seems like a decent enough idea, doesn't protrude & won't get moved accidentally. The green & exposure comp buttons look like their positions were influenced by style (line-em-up) possibly harder to reach than they had to be -- a la K-01 but these don't look as bad as that, plus they may actually be OK in the hand. Anyway, if you stick with two hands and lighter lenses the less ergonomic grip (and lack of battery grip option) might not be too big a liability.</p>

<p>The K2 and MX had a little more elegance in some of the details than the KM, KX, and K1000. A detail that comes to mind is the exposure counter for these models being integrated into the body rather than into the more plastic-ey advance lever. The K-series bodies were a bit of a product of enlarging the bodies for the electronic capabilities of the spotmatic F, electro spotmatic, etc. and lost some of the more svelte lines of the full-manual spotmatics (and earlier) that were not regained until the ME/MX.</p>

<p>Interesting, the viewfinder indicators are similar to what early AF cameras such as Pentax ME-F or SF had. I wasn't aware there were some manual focus bodies with similar capability.</p>

<p>I think it will break your stated budget a little but if you want longer than 300mm, the Tokina 80-400 wouldn't be too big of a stretch.</p>

<p>I don't think the shutter count would normally be incorrect though conceivably it might be reset if camera was serviced. I don't believe this normally gets reset during normal firmware updates.</p> <p>400 sounds super low. I would hope body is nearly pristine. Anyway, I don't think there's anything in particular to look out for; just use it and look for anything especially odd.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Another nice feature - mechanical (no batteries required) shutter for X (1/75) - 1/2000. Also one of the few Pentax 135 film bodies that offers mirror lockup. Compact for a pro-build camera.</p>

<p>It's a decent body and lens but the large supply of and limited demand for these bodies mean they don't fetch very much money. The ZX-7 is sort of a mid-range consumer body -- has more than the bare minimum but lacks a few things like DoF preview and some features like continuous autofocus are only available when using a 'sports' scene mode, etc. The main bugaboo on these bodies was a plastic gear on the mirror motor that fails a bit too soon and as the price of these bodies has dropped and parts harder to get has made it less likely that people will get them repaired.</p> <p>Most people who will purchase will seek the better MZ-5 or MZ-6 (or even PZ-1) since they don't cost all that much more now. The lens is still fully usable on Pentax DSLRs (autofocus, all AE modes, stabilized on most bodies, etc.) but 28-200 isn't the most attractive lens for APS-C bodies (42-300 equivalent). I would still expect it to fetch significantly more than the body. </p> <p>One of the nice things about the MZ/ZX-6 and -7 (yours) is that unlike many Pentax film bodies (including the further upmarket MZ-5 and MZ-S) they don't require lenses to have aperture rings for Av or Manual modes. Pentax was starting to remove aperture rings from lenses around this time, and the made-for-digital lenses don't have them anymore. They're also better than some of the contemporary lower-end bodies like MZ/ZX-30/50/60 that had crippled mounts that wouldn't work with older manual focus lenses.</p> <p>Another resource for used Pentax gear is the marketplace on pentaxforums.com though I imagine you'll see there that a lot of the film gear doesn't move all that fast.</p>

Nice trio. I have a meterless S1a which I take out to fondle every now and then. Love the film advance feel and the the beautiful looks of the early Pentax. I feel that they lost a little of that elegance with the chunkier late auto-exposure models and the K bodies. Got some of that back with the MX and ME though.

<p>If you were essentially satisfied with your ZX-50 I can't imagine that the minute differences between these current digital SLRs will be all that important.</p> <p>The K-50 is a fine camera, and your existing lenses will work on it (though you'll probably at least want the 18-55 kit lens since the 28-80 will no longer offer a wide angle view).</p> <p>Between the three, I like the Pentax's bigger & brighter pentaprism viewfinder, dual control e-dials (two separate dedicated controls for shutter & aperture, etc.) and weather-sealed body.</p> <p>The only thing I prefer on the Nikon or Canon is the extra quiet autofocus, even on their entry-level lenses. The Canon T3i also offers a tilting/flipping rear LCD screen that the Pentax and Nikon lack.</p>

<p>Interesting that on the Minolta the lithium battery holder was the rare & bulky extra. On the slightly newer Pentax SF series, lithiums were standard but they also offered a rare AA grip (took me a while to score one) that would take 4xAA but like this design for the 7000 was a bit bulkier.</p> <p>Thanks for sharing; as always, I love these posts.</p>

If you mean zoom, I think the DA 16-45/4 is a safe, inexpensive choice...punches above its weight if you don't need faster glass. K10D is a great model, excellent at low ISO, very good up to ISO 800, and a serviceable 1600 as long as you're careful not to underexpose. It's obviously missing live view and video, and it's rear LCD is lower-res by current standards but it's still a great picture- taking machine. If you want telephoto to go with, suggest DA 55-300/4-5.8.

Nice. I'll bet its viewfinder & shutter are much nicer than pretty much any M42 body. A couple years ago when my affliction was flaring up I assembled a Contax Aria kit, including a Zeiss 28/2.8, 45/2, and 85/2.8. Since I'm not really expecting to seek out any more C/Y zeiss glass I thought I might want to add a C/Y m42 adapter so I can mix in a few Taks.

<p>Nice shots, Hin. Even though FA lenses are often probably *better* than the manual focus editions, I tend to use the old -M or K glass with manual-focus film bodies. If I really wanted the best output, I'd probably use digital. I ultimately shoot film with manual focus more for the tactile experience and change in pace and thought process rather than the sharpest images.</p>

<blockquote> <p>"my most beautiful charm to be used with the Takumar"</p> </blockquote> <p>Now we're talking, nice spotty!</p> <p>I don't think the coatings between Takumar/Auto-Takumar/Super-Takumar/SMC Takumar are the same. The older ones also probably don't stop down automatically when shooting (with an appropriate capable body, the oldest bodies didn't support this either).</p> <p> </p>