michael_kuhne

<p>Now I understand. You are talking about using aperture priority with old MF lenses. Although Pentax can rightfully brag about being able to use these old lenses with all their modern DSLR bodies, the truth is, the metering is not normal. It changes according to different aperture settings by a certain amount. Once you get used to just by how much, you can predict it and compensate. I have not done this with my old lenses for quite a while, so I cannot remember whether I used manual mode and the green button to set exposure or aperture priority. I do remember it was a bit tricky at first. I don't not know why Pentax did not employ full aperture priority AE metering on their DSLR bodies for old MF lenses like they did with their AF film bodies, maybe to keep cost and size down, who knows.</p>

<p>BTW, if you decide on the nicer lens, I have noticed through B&H, a price deal on Pentax lenses has been running- probably from Pentax so other dealers as well would have the offer. But you'd have to buy the lens today, probably on line, because it ends tonight before midnight. The 18-55mm WR lens comes with a lens hood having a small reach-in window at the bottom for using rotation-adjustable filters. With the special price, B&H has it at about $150 (saves about $35 bought today), compared to about $85 in lens cost for buying the kit and getting that version.</p> <p>If you'd like to go EXTRA nice, the Pentax 18-135mm WR certainly is that. It is not all that much bigger, yet has far more reach, and has an ultra quiet, fast-focussing, and very accurate focussing motor. It is heavier of course, but its build and feel are of higher quality. Nothing rotates or moves when it focusses. Same style of lens hood. I just got back from attending Gettysburg's annual Dedication and Remembrance Day, and used this lens a lot for the parade and on the battlefield with excellent results. My go-to zoom lenses for quality operation and extra versatility are that one and my excellent Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 EX DG pro style.</p>

<p>I also agree regarding the battery life with these smaller cameras. Just get an extra battery. The standard kit lens with the K50 is, I believe, also designed having WR. But I think the kit lenses with these less expensive models have a plastic lens-mount plate instead of metal, and no lens hood. For that reason, some just buy the body and get the upgrade version of that lens separately. For those buying the kit, those factors are not important. They would be for me.</p>

<p>The Nikon 35mm f/1.8 should be a nice all-around lens and fast for low light work. But does it have anti-shake? I do and have done a lot of low light photography, going back to the film days, but now I don't usually need to use a tripod, as others without anti-shake would have to.</p> <p>I don't understand what issues you have with aperture priority operation. It was the first and then the only auto-exposure mode. These days, you use it when it is important to select a particular aperture and in conditions where you'll be moving the camera around, or the lighting will constantly change, so you'll need auto exposure while maintaining the aperture of your choice. As long as you understand the reasons a particular aperture is important, and what it can do for your shot, the rest is self-explanitory.</p>

<p>I second what Javier said. In addition to WR you get thumb and finger dial operation, and with that I am sure the Pentax Hyper Program system as well. I describe this in the other recent thread by Jason Inskeep, addressing getting a new camera body. The 16mp sensor Pentax uses is a very good one.</p> <p>Better build quality with WR, better ergonomics, 2-dial operation, at that price point, amazing! Who but Pentax offers that?</p>

<p>I agree. I too have this wonderful lens. I advise getting the Hoya HD haze protective filter. I've been getting remarkable results throughout the zoom range. From 55mm to 200mm, it can do f/4.5 or about a stop off the big heavy 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses, and with very fine image quality.</p>

<p>I noticed B&H, perhaps others too, are running some good deals. $670 for the full-frame 77mm f/1.8 Limited- a $227 savings! Only $256 for the DA 55-300 WR HD, some $130 off! Many others too. The deals end 12-01-15 before midnight.</p>

<p>It seems you are operating with a huge case of over-apprehension. B&H has over 180 customer/owner reviews for the K-3. Many are long-time Pentax users, but not all. Out of those, only 14 complained about noise. Do you shoot mostly JPEGS or RAW? If you shoot RAW, much of the results will depend on the RAW processor you use, and your expertise in using it. I shoot mostly JPEGS because if I get my exposure, etc right, I will need no post process. I don't like sitting and fiddling with a computer. When I do shoot RAW+JPEG, I use the Pentax software furnished, and that only when I am dealing with important shots having very contrasty situations, requiring all the dynamic range possible to protect highlights and open up shadows, without diminishing contrast too much. Otherwise, I have been unable to see a difference to justify my fooling with RAW on a regular basis. But that is just me.</p> <p>I did not read them all, but the first customer review or so I found was a pro photographer who explained the noise "issue" being related to not employing the AA filter. Makes sense. The noise reduction application itself is also a smoothing process, and reduces detail. Pentax's approach is to apply as little as possible to preserve detail, but allows the user to set a preference. Other brands sometimes appearing to have "less noise" also have less detail at higher ISO due to more aggressive NR. Even at its "worst", I believe the K-3 would be far better than your K-200D in every respect. I also saw a review by a semi-pro who was an avid Nikon user for 21 years. He expressed amazement for the K-3 he now owns. As to AF, I generally keep mine set to center sensor only. Then I can control where in the scene will be the focus point. I choose it, freeze focus by holding the half-press, and move the camera to compose the shot. I've had good results. </p> <p>To get a comparison, I suggest you visit the Imaging Resource website, and use their "comparometer" to view the same image from two different camera models. To bring up an older model, you have to click on "all" cameras at the top. Then you can compare the K200D and K-3 directly, or any other model. There's an image featuring bottles, etc where you can scroll down to higher ISO settings for noise. Select one and then click on it again once it comes up, which will produce a blowup. These images are all JPEGs with the camera's auto processing, and at default settings. Look at shadows between the objects to check for noise, with side-by-side comparison of the two camera models. It is also easy to see the difference in resolution and fine detail as well.</p> <p>I don't know how one could expect to otherwise get high-end gear offering all the K-3 offers for only $650 or less for a new camera with warranty! If you'd rather go really cheap-o, the K-50 is offered at only 300 bucks! Where else can you get a well-made weather-sealed body for that!? Now is the time for these bargains.</p> <p>With Nikon, you have to get one of their more expensive bodies, or many of their older but very good lenses will not AF, because the less expensive bodies require the lens to have its own AF motor. If you get say a fast 50mm f/1.8 lens for low light/fast action use, it will probably not have anti shake, or AF. With Canon, no ant-shake, far as I know.</p> <p> <br> </p>

<p>I should have said- IF you get a K-3 or a K-5II(s), or a KS2 for that matter. Not that the image quality of the K200D is not good, but when I went on to get the K20D I noticed a definite improvement in resolution. I kept using the K200D when I needed a lighter body and if the difference in resolution would not be of value for the occasion, the I.Q. still being good. </p> <p>Then when I got the K-5 I was amazed that there was yet more improvement, and far better low noise performance, even with the higher MP sensor.</p> <p>I do not have the DA 70mm f2.4 Limited, which has been given a very high rating in lab tests, and praise from numerous owners here. I do have the full-frame FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited, which I prize greatly. The 70mm actually tested at 65mm. The 77mm actually tested right on at 77mm. It is very compact for what it is, good in low light, and just a great lens. Among other uses, I have found it good for doing candid people shots, giving adequate distance not to be obtrusive with its small size.</p> <p>But I do believe now that a more capable body can bring out the best in a top quality lens.</p>

<p>By the way, once you get a K-3, I would be interested in hearing your re-evaluation of your DA 70mm Limited!</p>

<p>Anything made by man can have a defect. As you yourself just brought up with Canon and Nikon, as well as other brands, none are always perfect. Perhaps they are more responsive to service issues- I don't know. But I have read of complaints and of dissatisfaction with them as well in that regard. Over the years, I have known of some production/design problems from Canon and Nikon. Back during the film era, it was so bad for a time, that pro photographers used to rate their film slightly off the ISO value to compensate for the off metering of certain pro level Canon models. </p> <p>Pentax has occasionally had issues with certain DSLR models, which I avoided even though production corrections were made and the reported problem no longer appeared. There was an excessive mirror slap problem with the little K-x. I bought the subsequent model, the K-r, which does not have the problem. I have not heard of a mirror problem of a recurring or chronic nature pertaining to the K-3. I still have and occasionally use several Pentax AF film bodies, some of which have seen a fair amount of use over time, without issues. Some have seen only sparse use, due to acquiring DSLRs after they improved enough to be attractive. The K1000 is a very old camera. There usually is some degree of deterioration of materials over time, and a need for refurbishment when it comes to such old bodies. As to DSLRs, I have owned the *istD, K100D, K200D, K20D, K-5, K-5IIs, and K-r. All have seen no more than moderate use, since I have distributed my activity among them, as even after getting my latest model I continue to employ the older ones as well. I have yet to encounter any issues, except for one, the K200D, suddenly using excessive battery power. I have heard that is an easy fix for a repair shop, but I haven't yet bothered to get it fixed. I have absolutely no apprehension that it will not be expertly and expeditiously taken care of.</p> <p>Pentax USA used to have their own repair facility. Pretty good, from what I've read. But in more recent times, I understand their service matters are farmed out to an outside repair contractor. I don't know whether that has changed since the take over by Ricoh. Ricoh is a big outfit. One would think they would look out for the Pentax reputation, since investing in it.</p> <p>A new Pentax DSLR camera comes with a one year factory warranty, as sold through an authorized Pentax dealer. From my experience, that includes Amazon. I believe, still at reasonable cost, that warranty can be extended. That was so in the past. When I bought my K20D at a clearance price of $650, the extended warranty was offered free! I never had to use it. B&H also has an outside service facility they deal with and have confidence in, for which they sell an extended warranty. </p> <p> </p>

<p>Pentax models are exclusive, far as I know, in featuring switchable AA filtering. A great idea, I think.</p>

<p>Oh, and that price is with free shipping, and for now at least, B&H is throwing in a free small Pentax hot-shoe flash. I have never seen that before. It may provide more reach than the built-in for times when you need a little more. </p>

<p>Actually, I just checked around, and found out B&H now has the K-3 new at only $650!! It would cost about $100 more to buy a K-5IIs! Both originally sold for over $1,200. The K-3 is now an outgoing model, still produced but at the end of its model run. This is the time to buy at bargain prices. That is how I bought my K-5IIs, and previously my K20D. I bought mine for less than it sells for now, which is hard to understand.</p> <p>Incidentally, since you mentioned viewfinders, all three models feature 100% coverage pro-quality pentaprism VFs, which your K200D does not. You will notice the difference in accuracy of your framing and overall quality. The K-5 series features magnification at 92%, while the K-3 and the little KS2 VF come in at 95% magnification. These are considerably greater than the magnification offered by those of Nikon or Canon.</p>

<p>Using a Pentax DSLR which are relatively compact, with excellent Limited compact lenses, is a way of having full-featured excellence but still fairly compact. The K-5, II and IIs have remarkably quiet shutters. You will hardly realize the camera has fired. I do not have the K-3, but that is probably true with it also. Not so true with the other Pentax models. The K-5 series was replaced by the K-3. I can tell you the K-5IIs delivers remarkably detailed results, even at higher ISO settings, and left over new stock is bound to be at a very reasonable price, and will come with a company warranty. Check Amazon. The price of the K-3 has come down considerably by now. It does have the switchable AA filter, if ever needed. Its 23MP sensor is not as natively low-noise as that of that of the 16MP K-5 series, so it uses more aggressive noise reduction, but with still pretty good results, from what others have said.</p> <p>I don't normally shoot in any particular mode. I always set my camera back to the Program mode when I am done. I use aperture priority only when control of aperture is meaningful for what I am doing. Likewise with shutter priority. I also shoot in Manual mode when that is best.</p> <p>Like you and many here, I too am basically self-taught. When I started, there was no Program mode, aperture priority, shutter priority, or auto anything. Just in-camera match-needle metering. With every shot, if you moved the camera or the lighting changed, you had to read the meter, adjust your settings for exposure and focus manually. While still at times that is the best way to go, now there are more options and advanced technology, which can make for much faster operation. The Pentax Hyper system is really good engineering. dpreview raved about it back when they tested the K10D. There's also the Hyper manual operation. Great for spot-metering around a scene in Manual mode. To take readings, just hit the green button. It instantly sets your aperture and shutter speed according to the spot meter and gives you an exposure reading. You can then adjust the specific aperture/shutter speed to meet your need from there. You can hit the AE-L button to lock exposure, if you want a different aperture, then adjust it with the thumb dial and the shutter speed will follow along to keep exposure the same. Works the same way if you adjust shutter speed, aperture will follow along. It makes for very fast Manual mode operation. I think the K200D does have that feature for Manual mode. I have not been using mine for quite some time. </p>

<p>Another difference is the KS2 having no top LCD info panel, which was sacrificed for more compactness. It is however, amazing for having the features it does plus weather sealing at its price point and for the type of camera it is. However, the K-5II(s) K-3, though somewhat larger, are still quite compact for the type of camera they are- professional controls, metal bodies, etc.</p> <p>It sounds like you may be happier with a K-5II(s) or K-3 with your experience, though they are without the wifi and flip-out back LCD. Any of these 3 cameras will provide you with a better realization of the excellent image quality your fine lenses are capable of.</p> <p>With the Pentax Hyper Program system, you may find yourself shooting in Program mode more often. If you are shooting photos of your kids for instance, and not happy with the shutter speed or aperture you are getting, you can simply use the finger or thumb dial to instantly dial in one of your preference without having to first go to the mode dial to change exposure modes to Av or Tv. It will stay at your setting until you turn the camera off, or hit the green button, which returns function instantly back to full Program. The system is very fast for making immediate changes on the fly. This, of course does not apply to your older manual lenses.</p> <p>Of course, if you wish your setting to stay put when you'll be turning the camera off during a lull in activity, it would be better to use the mode dial.</p>

<p>I believe my K-5IIs has more reliable AF than my original K-5. The "S" means it has no AA filter for extra sharpness of detail. The filter is supposed to reduce moire effects that can occur under certain circumstances. I have not yet seen moire, but I guess it could occur. The sharpness and low light/high ISO lower noise are really good. </p> <p>I have the K200D. but may replace it with the KS2 as my compact weather-sealed model soon. The KS2 has special features like the flip-out LCD screen and wifi. It is very compact and extremely well-built, but it is not of professional design standards like the K-5 or K-3. If you buy it, get extra batteries to charge up, because it runs low rather soon if you are shooting a lot. But it may also take commonly AA lithiums via an optional adaptor like the K-r does, in case you're in a pinch.</p> <p>The K-5 or K-3 are different animals than you are used to. Very rugged They are of professional design, having that type of control layout. No "scene" modes on the mode dial. AF motors are heavier duty, and probably faster. More controls on body instead of in menu. The K-3 has no AA filter, but a type of AA filter can be switched on if moire is detected. AA filters reduce moire by smoothing, which can also reduce fine detail. The compact KS2 also has this switchable feature. The K50 is discontinued and I think the KS1 as well. but still available. The K-5, K-3 and KS2 all have 2-dial thumb and finger operation, which is faster for making adjustments. The fast, exclusive Pentax Hyper system is fully available.</p> <p>The lenses you have are outstanding for image quality and build. You might want to consider adding a fast f/1.4 or f/1.8 50mm lens for low light, or fast action use.</p> <p>Prices now on all the models mentioned are at bargain levels. </p> <p> </p>

<p>I just discovered the new Sony a7R II, which has a FF 42.4 MP back-illuminated sensor for improved lower noise at high ISO. Seems to me like this is now the cutting edge. To enter the FF arena, I think that would be a good thing for Pentax, if possible. Pentax may have to settle on less until this sensor or one similar becomes available for their use, if it is not now.</p>

<p>I've seen reference to a new sensor technology with better light-gathering, with lower noise while having higher MPs. I think even so, a 50MP model as Canon has introduced, would still require much more noise reduction and thus lose the added resolution in the process, while producing huge files. This new type of sensor at 40-or 42 MPs might be the answer. A significant jump in resolution, with good noise performance and resolution at higher ISO. With FF, more MPs are needed anyway to equal or better the resolution within the frame compared to APS-C models with less MPs.</p> <p>I actually agree with John and Doug, I am very happy with the performance of both my K-5 II and K20D, and the fine lenses I have been using with them. I cannot see logic in getting a big, heavy, expensive 70-200mm f/2.8 for FF use, for instance, since tele work is advantageous when using a high-quality APS-C body. I would certainly prefer using my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 at a fraction the weight and size. If I got the 70-200mm f/2.8, I'd put it to APS-C use anyway, where it would be like a 100-300mm f/2.8 lens. And my DA 12-24mm f/4 is a great wide angle lens.</p> <p>My interest is in using my very fine, fast FA 35mm f/2 again as a wide angle instead of "normal". Hard to find a wide angle that fast and that good for APS-C. The famous FA 31mm f/1.8 Limited would also be more intriguing for me on a FF DSLR. My DA 21mm f/3.2 Limited is a wonderful lens, being so compact- I love it, but it ain't f/1.8! And, the 31mm has lower distortion. For a WA zoom, if I only have the FF model along, my old but very fine Tokina 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 II (well-built, metal body) has given me excellent film shots. My fast FA 50mm f/1.4 and F 50mm f/1.8 (I got both years ago new but very cheap!), which I've been occasionally using as fast short tele lenses will again be "normal", as will my fast wide-normal 43mm f/1.9 Limited. My really good Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 will give me a 24mm wide angle again instead of 36mm, if I need that. If I need a fast mid zoom with more tele emphasis, my old, fine Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8 Pro II goes back into action. No need to even think about the DA* 16-50mm. I do also have excellent AF tele lenses of FF design, which sometimes may be better used on a FF body if the distance I'm shooting from will frame better that way- DA* 200mm f/2.8 and FA* 300mm f/4.5 primes.</p> <p>A really good FF model meeting my expectations would certainly open new doors in the wide angle fast lens category and offer more flexibility, along with the APS-C models I have been using, especially since I already have these lenses.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Including a built-in flash, and finally a standard flash sync of at least 1/250 sec. It should not be a design based on already soon-to-be-obsolete technology. it should have a cutting edge sensor type, and around 40 or 42MP. All in a body about the size/weight of the K20D would be appealing. </p> <p>The fact that I already have numerous highly-rated lenses of FF design for film use, has got me thinking about the possibilities a FF DSLR may offer, instead of always having to go to film to use them in the perspective of their original angle of view.. </p>

<p>The fisheye zoom was for many years an exclusive Pentax concept. Only in more recent years has it been offered for other mounts via Tokina. I agree, Tokina has a long history of very well-built lenses with fine optics. I have their AF 28-70mm f/2.8 Pro II and 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 II from the late film era. Both very fine.</p>

<p>I have both SDM (prime and zoom) and DC lenses, in addition to my screw drive ones. I do not have the 20-40mm LTD. </p> <p>With my K5 IIs and my K-20D I have found that my larger-aperture lenses with screw drive acheive slightly quicker focus than those of self-motorized types, but of course with the little zzt noise. I too have the Pentax F 50mm f/1.7, a very fine lens. But the 77mm LTD is in a different class in many respects. Both are useful at their respective focal lengths. With the 77mm you would not have to get as close to your subject. Very good for candid shots. It features superb bokeh, has a built-in lens hood, and has a very fine manual-focus feel. Its build quality is on another level, though the 50mm is good. Since you already have the 50mm, you would have a greater difference in focal length by acquiring the 77mm over the 70mm, as well as a stop more of speed, which by providing more light helps AF. The 77mm is also amazingly small for its focal length and aperture. It tested as actually 77mm, while the 70mm came out as 65mm. The 77mm would be a very good kit addition to your 20-40mm LTD and 50mm. As you go more into telephoto, however, it does become increasingly trickier to "nail" your subject as you handle your equipment. If you can do well with a much larger say 200mm lens, the 77mm will be a breeze. Practice makes perfect.</p> <p>I do think the upper line of Pentax professional style bodies have better AF mechanisms than do the types of the K-200D variety. </p>

<p>Back in the 1980's, Pentax is the company who introduced the built-in flash for SLR cameras. It was and still is a great idea. Even while acknowledging the limitations of such a flash, it often comes in very handy to catch a shot otherwise missed or be minus the benefits flash can offer.</p> <p>Canon and Nikon's top models have long been without a built-in flash because they are meant for professional use under professional set-ups, or in a field where such a flash would be useless. This narrows the target-field of customers, which Nikon and Canon can get away with, but for Pentax is questionable.</p> <p>I hope when Pentax gets going in offering full-frame models, these will have a built-in flash for such cameras being used in a wide range of photography, not just professional setups. Pentax should stick with the good idea they originated and others have widely adopted.</p> <p>Of course Pentax has long made professional cameras by the standards used for that category- build quality, control layout, etc. If a larger company should buy Nikon, will it then be an "orphan brand"?</p>

<p>Obviously, Kan Rottwell had nothing better to do than find something negative to say about a product of superior design and build for the dollar than his usual brand has for a comparable price. He obviously has not used or know of the fast and efficient Pentax Hyper system, or the fact Pentax can provide SR with any lens. He speaks of the sound of the AF, which of course indicates he was using a screw-drive lens, naturally being from 1980's AF design. He fails to mention that many Nikon bodies of moderate price range cannot use such older style AF lenses and get AF at all, since they must rely on the lens having its own AF motor. They cannot AF with many lenses Nikon still sells!</p> <p>I have been successful shooting fast action sports with a fast lens, having screw-drive AF, on a Pentax body. Although audible, I have found that screw-drive AF can be quite fast and accurate, though Nikon and Cannon are said to have better AF technology for tracking action.</p> <p>He speaks of Pentax being toy-like, and must be referring to their more compact size, and yes that is not pleasing to everyone. Some people do prefer a larger design. Pentax entry-level bodies are generally better constructed than the flimsier, more plasticy competition.</p> <p>All this is not to say that Nikon or Canon do not make fine cameras and equipment- of course they do. All offer certain advantages. Different designs appeal to different preferences. Rockwell was acting in a manner beneath his level of experience and maturity, if that quote is true.</p> <p> </p>

<p>For low noise and very high quality, it's hard to beat the K-5 series, though they are getting scarce. The K-3 appears to be a fine choice, but I do not have one myself. Both are professional-style cameras as was the K20D. I agree about not having the handy immediacy of the built-in flash with the K-3 II.</p> <p>If an even smaller, more casual camera is desired, the new KS2 has some interesting new features, including the articulating LCD screen. It is amazing for its size and price point. All these newer models will easily outperform the K-20D in terms of lower noise at higher ISO. </p> <p>For a very versatile zoom lens for all-around use, I would suggest the DA 18-135mm WR. I have found it to be very useful for a variety of situations- good range, well built, and having a weather-resistant design to complement the WR bodies. If needing a longer tele range, the DA 55-300mm WR is great choice. <br> </p>