michael_kuhne

<p>One other thing- if you do decide for the K-70, it is advisable to also get an extra battery. The more compact Pentax DSLR models use a smaller battery than the K-5, K-3 class, which do not last near as long. So keeping a charged up spare on hand when you are doing more extended shooting is a good idea. </p>

<p>Another thing to keep in mind is the lenses used with a particular camera model. I had a couple of lenses I noticed did not AF as surely with my K-5 as they had with previous models! They were just fine with the K-5IIs. The K2S seems to do well also. Some lenses, however, are inherently faster and/or more accurate auto-focussing than others regardless of the camera. You do not mention which lenses you will be using. Also, do not expect the super-quiet shutter with the K-70 that is characteristic of the K-5 models, or K-3. </p> <p>My impression is there have been some improvements in AF, but Pentax is not known for especially fast AF, though it is generally accurate when used properly with the half-press or AF button. This should not be an issue for the shooting uses you indicate.</p>

<p>Fortunately, I've not yet experienced noticeable moire from not having the filter (knocking on wood)! The K-70 also has the switchable filter, like the K-3. It has the articulating rear LCD screen for shooting live view from odd angles, is wifi capable, as well as having the new pixel-shift ultra resolution feature, and GPS can be added with an accessory at a modest extra cost. It is then also capable for astro photography.</p> <p>In-depth reviews are still to come for the K-70, which should materialize within the next few months, I would think.</p>

<p>I found the K-5IIs to have a more responsive, accurate AF which functions better with a greater number of my lenses than my K-5. But now a new K-5IIs may be difficult to find, since it has been discontinued for a while. The K-3 might have a yet slightly improved AF, but I have not seen this confirmed by those having both.</p> <p>I will be looking to get a new K-70 myself, mainly because it's high ISO low, noise performance has been shown as outstanding. Easily better than the K-3 and even noticeably better than any K-5 model, which were very good. I also like its small size. I have read both the KS2 and new K-70 have updated, stronger AF motors than previous Pentax models in this camera class. The K-70 is also compatible with the new Pentax AF PLM lens motor now being introduced in the latest Pentax lenses, namely the newest 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 PLM WR, which is supposed to be much faster and more accurate. But I will not be giving up my K-5IIs, because I like its pro style control set along with its fine performance.</p>

<p>That is really weird! Makes me wonder if you have a defective copy? Too bad, since that lens has been getting very good reviews.</p>

<p>I just discovered that the Tamron version does have "moisture resistant" construction. I believe this is a first for 3rd party offerings. For Nikon and Canon mounts it also includes shake reduction, unusual for this focal length, and definitely attractive for those using these brands. B&H has it for about the same price as the Pentax brand version, however, although now Tamron is offering Canikon owners a temporary $200 rebate. </p>

<p>Here in the US, B&H offers this Pentax lens for about $1.300. Nikon's equivalent AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 is offered for about $1,800. It does have some convenience advantage in its 77mm filter design, a common size with other pro type fast lenses, but my impression from test results I've seen is no better for IQ than the Pentax/Tamron lens. Speaking of size and weight, the Nikon lens is about 4oz. heavier and nearly 1" longer! It is also not a VR lens, so no shake reduction is to be had when using their lens, while with Pentax SR in the camera body is available with any lens.</p> <p>As others have said above, the Pentax upgrades are real. The SDM and quick-shift are very nice to have, WR sealing is a definite advantage, and the special Pentax coatings include scratch and smudge resistance, and an HD coating. After my original DA 55-300mm suffered an accident slightly damaging the front filter threads, I decided to replace it with a new one, the same lens but now with the HD coating. I was surprised to find I have been getting noticeably better results than with the old lens!</p>

<p>The zoom range is actually greater with the Pentax 24-70mm, which is why it is somewhat larger with a filter size of 82mm. It is full-frame for the K-1 and film bodies, and also nicer for alternate use on your K-3, since 24mm still provides a wide-angle view. Although it is essentially the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8, it is an upgraded version of that model, since you get WR construction and the Pentax coatings, which many have said offer superior performance for clarity and in dealing with flare. The Tamron version has received excellent reviews. The Pentax version should fare even better with its upgraded coatings and WR. The Tamron version, however, costs less. Sigma also makes a 24-70mm f/2.8, but again without WR construction, etc.</p> <p>The Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 remains a very good value with very good performance, if it satisfies all your needs. </p>

<p>Right, Tim! This is a non-complete review. It is a first-impressions review. Their complete test review will appear at a later date. The ISO 12,800 comparison given here certainly is impressive! It substantiates what I've seen as well in their comparometer test shots. </p>

<p>Their complete review of the K-70 is yet to come. The images done for the comparometer reveal truly remarkable performance for low noise and excellent detail! I viewed the house image (where detail was excellent) and the still-life mage, clicking to get the big blowups, and compared it with some other current Pentax APS-C models, and also with the K-5IIs. I viewed and compared the still-life image at ISO settings between 800- 12,800. The K-70 was waayy better than the K-3 in the higher ISO range over 1600, with much lower noise in areas of comparable degree of shadow, while preserving superior detail, such as in the figure on the HELLAS wine bottle. The closest other was the K-5IIs, where the KS2 did a little better job of noise suppression over the K-5IIs, but the KS2 did not preserve fine detail quite as well as the K-5IIs did which was excellent. The K-70 was easily above all in both respects except the K-1, where even against the might of this excellent FF beast it held up quite well! Even at ISO 25,600 it appears to deliver a usable image! I didn't try going higher. </p>

<p>I agree with Doug, and with your own comment- the resolution looks impressive to me also. The DA* 200mm f/2.8 is certainly a fine lens. But what was your shutter speed?</p>

<p>Thanks, Zane. That does sound logical.</p>

<p>Since the grip was designed so long ago, I'm wondering about the safety of using lithiums in it. I use the grip on a Pentax ZX-L body, on occasion. The MZ-S employs a different grip, which does accept lithiums. A set of new lithiums would last a long time. Also, I replace the lithiums I use in a flash unit when the flash recycle gets slow. There is often still plenty of juice left for other purposes, so I put them aside for various devices.</p>

<p>Film bodies being so cheap these days, it is likely repair charges would be more than a replacement might be. I suggest taking a look at the recent posting regarding a Pentax ZX-10 for a discussion of available used film bodies, in this case autofocus models.</p>

<p>Good valuable info, Andrew. The very cheap prices of film bodies these days makes it attractive to own both film and digital bodies.</p>

<p>One other tid-bit. You can get a little step down double-threaded adaptor ring allowing your 55mm polarizing filter to be used on your 52mm lens. It would be specific for 55/52mm. You could get another for an even smaller size lens. They are not expensive. You cannot, however, go to a larger size lens. It only works going the downwards direction, to smaller lens sizes than your filter size.</p>

<p>You have a 35mm film SLR camera and corresponding lenses. SLR means when you look through the viewfinder you are actually looking right through the lens itself instead of a separate viewfinder like a point & shoot camera. The digital version of this is a DSLR. 35mm film means that the actual size of the picture frame on the film measures 36mm long by 24mm high. Most DSLR cameras have sensors that are smaller- 24mm long by 16mm high (APS-C size), which is still far larger than sensors of most point & shoot digital compact cameras. A DSLR having the same size sensor as 35mm film bodies is called a "full-frame" model. They are very expensive. The larger sensors allow for greater sizes in doing big prints and blowups while preserving quality.</p> <p>The 32, 22, 16, 11, 8, etc. are "f" aperture settings on the aperture rings of your lenses. There is a little release button to move the aperture ring off from "A" to select a particular aperture. Leaving it on"A" means aperture is then selected from the camera body to the degree that body's controls allow. Pentax DSLR cameras are designed to leave the lens set on "A" with full aperture controls provided on the camera body. Newer lenses designed for DSLR use do not even have an aperture ring at all A smaller number actually means a larger aperture. The one lens you have that can go to f/2.8 is capable of opening up its aperture bigger to allow more light to come in to the film or sensor. This can increase your shutter speed because if there is less light through the lens, the shutter speed has to be slower to let in more light. If you can have a faster shutter speed you can freeze subjects for clearer faster action shots, or hand hold the camera in dimmer light without blur due to your body's slight motion. But a greater aperture (smaller number) also means less depth of field- less of the background/foreground will be sharp. This can be a good or a bad thing. These are some reasons why it is important for the photographer to be able to select a particular aperture.</p> <p>The red dot is there to help line up the lens when attaching it to the camera. If you remove the lens that is on the camera by holding down the release button on the front of the camera near the bottom next to the lens, and turning the lens counter-clockwise, you will see a corresponding red dot on the lens mount. To put a lens onto the camera you do not need to use the release button. Just line up the lens' red dot to the one on the camera's lens mount, and turn clock-wise after the lens sinks into place. You will detect a "click" when the lens is secured.</p> <p>The 55mm and 52mm on your lenses are the sizes for filters that would fit in order to screw them into the lens' front end to go over the front glass element, as well as the front lens cap size. You have 2 filters of different brands and types, both of the same size-55mm. The UV filter is mainly used as a protector for the lens' front element. The other is a circular polarizing filter, and can be very useful for cutting reflections and for extra bluing up of the sky on sunny days. It has its own little inner ring to rotate it for best effect after it is installed on your lens. The #2 means 2-stops, which indicates its strength. This filter's benefits come at a price, which is cutting the amount of light coming through your lens. 2 stops means cutting the light once in half then cutting that again in half. So if your shutter speed using the same film sensitivity, or ISO on a DSLR, under the same lighting conditions, would be cut to 1/4 of that without the filter. You can often compensate by selecting a larger aperture, or if your camera is in an auto-program mode, it will do this automatically. It will display the figures, in case you wish to set a different value yourself. The little "cup" is probably a rear lens cover for when the lens is off the camera.. It is the same size for all lenses that fit on a Pentax body.</p> <p>The bottom line for film and digital: <br /> With digital you can shoot away and not be concerned about the cost and inconvenience of film processing. And you can see your results right away and make adjustments if needed. It is convenient for sending through the internet. <br /> Many of us still occasionally shoot film. If I want multiple sets of 5x7 prints, I can get a better deal over digital if I order at the time of film processing. Or just for the special qualities of a particular film. You can also order your photos to be put on a CD as well as your prints at the time of processing at little extra cost. The files are usually small and of lesser quality, but good enough to view on a computer or to e-mail. Film is still best for learning photography in terms of setting your exposure- as shooting slide film is the purest way of getting the exact exposure you have selected when shooting in manual mode and choosing you own aperture and shutter speed by taking meter readings, using the camera's meter system. Having both film and digital can be enjoyable. A decent used DSLR I would think could be found in say the $100-200 range. A good ZX 5n or ZX-L for a song.</p> <p>You may be able to still get a killer deal on a recently discontinued brand new K-50 DSLR body. Around the $300 or maybe less. It has a weather-sealed body, which can be found with other brands starting in the $1,000 range. Check B&H Photo, or Adorama, or Amazon. Or if a used model, the Pentax Forums website, or KEH have had good reports. Come to think of it, I have some low-use bodies I no longer use I should sell and list them soon.</p> <p>Your Sigma brand 100-300mm is a medium-to-long telephoto zoom lens. On a DSLR, because of the smaller sensor size, you get the effect of a yet longer tele range, but still using the same lens. The multiplying factor is about 1.5x so the size closeup of a distant subject you would get in your picture would be about like having a 150-450mm lens on your film body.</p> <p>Your Sigma 28-80mm is a wide angle-to-moderate telephoto on your film body. Versatile for many scenes. The "macro" setting is for getting very close to a small subject, like flowers, bugs, etc. Lenses without any macro capability cannot focus at as close a distance as those that have macro or are designed specifically as macro lenses, which are better yet. This lens is less useful on a DSLR because it no longer offers any wide angle. 28mm x 1.5 = 42mm which is not a very wide view. If you decide to get a DSLR it would therefore be advisable to also get a "kit" lens of at least 18-55mm, which is about equivalent to your 28-80mm on your film body. Pentax makes one that is also weather sealed, and is pretty cheap if you buy it packaged with a new camera body. With that all weather sealed setup you could shoot in the rain! Your Sigma's 80mm macro setting could still be useful on a DSLR.</p> <p>Your Sigma "Super wide" 24mm lens is not really SUPER wide, but is extra-wide over your 28mm-80mm zoom lens. It is not a zoom lens. It stays at 24mm, and is referred to as a"prime" lens. Prime lenses are known to frequently have superior optical quality over zoom lenses, while zoom lenses offer greater versatility to frame your shot from where you stand. 24mm x 1.5= 36mm which is still a wide angle view on a DSLR. And it offers the bigger f2.8 aperture option. And it also has a macro setting- unusual for wide angle lens. This is the lens of highest optical quality among those you have. There are zoom lenses that have very fine optical quality, even some having f/2.8 aperture settings, but such are generally very expensive, and are heavier, bigger lenses.</p> <p> </p>

<p>One other thing- often a lens will have a thin protective filter screwed into its front having its own writing around its edge. This is not part of the lens.</p>

<p>Doug, of course, is right. The MZ-S is an exceptionally fine camera, and was published in Popular Photography's "Professional 35mm Cameras" listing. It was easily the smallest and lightest of this category, yet very well built with its metal magnesium alloy body. It does, however, also require any lens used with it to have an aperture ring for shooting in manual mode (M) or aperture preferred (Av). The ZX-L, therefore, is the most flexible in regards to lenses. It will simply accept both types and function either way. I agree about the control layout factor of the 5n, which offers center-weighted metering as well, if you should ever want it. It also has a superior, professional type viewfinder like the MZ-S. But the ZX-L is more sophisticated in its other control options, quite good for such a modest, compact model. I still own all three models, and have not encountered any vignetting from any lens due to the camera.</p> <p>You can find lens information right on the lens as to the brand, focal length range, maximum aperture, etc. Check just inside the front lens rim or around its edge. Also by its base. If there is an aperture ring, it is like a collar near the base with a list of number values (aperture settings) you can select by rotating the collar. It may have an "A" setting for electronic aperture control by the camera body's system for auto program modes instead of having to rotate the ring.</p> <p>The details of this information would be very helpful for us to get an idea of the class of lenses you have, and their potential uses.<br> </p> <p> </p>

<p>I am also wondering which lenses did you get? They may be useful for use with a DSLR as well, if you are interested. Pentax has some of the most advanced, full-featured DSLR bodies for the money. </p> <p>If you wish to continue with film, the ZX-5n would indeed be a good choice, but it only takes lenses having an aperture ring for access to all exposure modes. Another good inexpensive body in this series was the ZX-L, which could allow use of an aperture ring's mechanical aperture control, or also has electronic control of aperture available for lenses not having an aperture ring. Conversely, some older lenses have only the aperture ring with no "A" for automatic electronic control by the camera. Both of these models have spot metering available. </p>

<p>Hmmm.. electronic aperture? Sounds intriguing, but I wonder what that means outside of electronic aperture control vs. using an aperture ring as has been the case for some years. Perhaps the new PLM lens AF motor is behind the claim for much faster AF, replacing the DC and Pentax SDM motor systems. If that is true, too bad the other newer Pentax lenses do not have this new technology.</p> <p>Although the faster AF would be a good thing, I do, however, wonder about the optical quality of this new, slower-aperture lens, its f/4.5-f/6.3 being about 1/2 stop slower than f/4-f5.8 of the older lens, which has been shown to be well above average optically for such a lens. </p>

<p>The silver/black model is also in stock! At last Pentax offers an optional body color matching its silver colored lenses! There are a number of potentially desirable updates. On the Ricoh/Pentax website is more in-depth info, such as the new sensor combined with a new accellerator design claimed to enhance higher ISO performance with lower noise and greater detail preservation. Again, improved AF is claimed, as well as the pixel shift now with motion control, and also more HDR settings. Video is also updated. As to the optional astro-tracer/GPS module for the K-70 and KS2, that advanced and potentially useful accessory seems not to be found anywhere! <br> </p>

<p>Yes, David, I thoughtlessly omitted print size, sorry.</p> <p>Right, Howard, subject sharpness was the main issue. I got off the main issue in the long thread process, but of course it was. I hope comments have been helpful.</p>

<p>David, I'm glad you're happy with your Canon gear. It is obviously doing the job you selected it for, and I agree you've made a very appropriate choice. Yes, DSLRs for shooting fast-moving subjects are generally of less MP design for faster write times and higher FPS with larger buffer capacity. That serves your needs very well. And yes, a 20MP or less FF model can deliver clean images. Likewise, I can even get clean images from my little general-use APS-c 12MP K-r. Yes, I know of cropping and its effects, which I now occasionally do digitally, but used to sometimes get done with reprints back in the film days.</p> <p>The only rationale for higher MP designs these days is to obtain yet higher resolution and greater cropping capability- but greater pixel density does come at a cost to those factors above, which are valuable to your requirements, including higher ISO performance.</p> <p>My position on advantages of both FF and of APS-c designs I have covered, so I'm done with that. Besides, I think we've gone way off the topic of this thread, which is sharp focus and background blur.</p> <p> </p>

<p>I've had few focus problems with my K-5. Much also depends on the lens used with it. I do not own the DA* 16-50, but I do own the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 without noticing AF difficulty. A couple of other lenses did not do so well with moving subjects. My K-5IIs has proven to be a definite improvement for more reliable AF with all my lenses.</p> <p>Some test reports state the K-1 AF to be fast but not as fast as some other brands. Some test reports state the K-1 AF does not do well tracking moving subjects, while other test reports state the K-1 AF tracks moving subjects just ok. The camera is too new for very many user reports at this point.</p>