trevor_newman1

<p>Doug,<br>

From what i have read this is because the K7's dust reduction system vibrates the low pass filter on the front of the sensor to eliminate dust which creates an imperceptible vibration that can only be heard on close close inspection. This is in contrast to the K20d which actually shakes the entire sensor assembly to remove dust, giving the camera quite a jolt in your hand!</p>

<p>Hi Matt,<br>

Unless you have a tripod handy, I would try experimenting more during the day, outside and in good light as it will give you a great deal more flexibility and a higher initial success rate. Even with ISO400 film and the lens you have, interior lighting is generally too low to allow you to hand hold the camera and avoid taking blurry pictures. Even during the day, indoor photography can require slower shutter speeds. On that note, if your camera doesn't have a meter, look up the Sunny 16 Rule and that should help your success rate as well. Good luck and enjoy! I always like to say that the art is in the limitations.</p>

<p>K20D w/18-55WR</p><div></div>

<p>K20D w/18-55 WR</p><div></div>

<p>Hey all,<br>

Sorry it has been so long. Law School is a lot like my my past girlfriends. I love it to death but it's kickin my butt. At least the scenery is lovely. I finally managed to get out of the library and take a few shots. Unfortunately it was a bit hazy. Next time I will put on the polarizer. Great stuff everyone. Michael, that picture of Mt. Rainer is outstanding and Robert I love the image of the rower. It takes me back to days of rowing on the Charles and the Schuylkill. Here are a few pics I snapped off from school. Even when I don't post I still check out all your work. Happy shooting!</p><div></div>

<p>Hi all,<br>

So I am looking into my next lens purcahse. I currently have an 18-55 WR and though I loved my F1.7 I had to return it upon finding it had an issue that I did not feel was warranted by the cost =(. So now I am still a one lens man. I generally shoot toward the wider angle of the spectrum, however I do quite a bit of portraiture and will be shooting my sisters wedding reception (outdoors). I have no specific genere of interest but I do like shallow depth of field. I tend not to shoot very often toward the telephoto end (for my nikon film cameras I have a 70-210 that rarely sees any use except for sporting events. I have a come up with few options but any of your input would be greatly appreciated. My goal is to stay around $400.<br>

1. Tamron 28-75 f/2.8: I could definitely use a standard lens that fits the portrait range on aps-c<br>

2. Sigma 24-70 f/2.8: A more expensive option...but is it worth it when compared to the tamron?<br>

3. Wait for another used 50 f/1.7 to come along and pair it with either a Pentax 50-200 WR or non WR, or a Sigma 70-300 DG APO.<br>

Also I have a lot of interest in the Tamron 17-50 2.8, especially for the wedding, but I feel it would be redundant considering I have the 18-55. However, it is expensive enough that it would be the only lens I could purchase right now and it seems pointless to only own two lenses with the same focal length. Of course I could always sell the 18-55 but it would be at a loss and the weather seals are a big plus for me, especially for outings in incliment weather...decisions decisions<br>

Thanks all!</p>

 

<p>Great stuff Javier! I love the graininess of the black and white! It also reminds me of pushed Tmax =). I especially enjoy the picture of the open subway door with the man looking at the camera. It sounds like you had quite an adventure. First two weeks of law school are done with hardly a second to take out my camera. I have got to make some time. Until then I shoot vicariously through you! Thanks for sharing Javier.</p>

 

<p>Halifax...when I was younger one of my favorite books was a kids book called <em>20 Minutes to Live</em> about the Halifax explosion<em>. </em> A rather ominous title and subject if you ask me! It was only until I was much older that I understood it was an actual event. Is the clock tower still there? I would love to see a picture of that. Great B+W Duane</p>

<p>and one more...=)</p><div></div>

<p>Wow this is some amazing stuff everyone, I offer you a couple of my humble selctions from my trip to the Getty villas today. Enjoy!</p><div></div>

<p>oh, they also appear to between elements and not right on top.</p>

<p>Hi all,<br>

So after a wonderful day with my new (used) lens at the Getty I switched lenses and noticed these odd bubbles/streaks along the circumference of the back element. I am not quite sure what it is. I don't think it's fungus but I have never had a lens with fungus. What do you all think...regardless this lens rocks.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi John,<br>

If you are even interested in this lens I say definitely go for it! Mine was $140 and like I said, wide open it has no comparison to my Nikon 50 1.8 which is going for about 140 new these days anyway. However, it was kind of difficult to find one of these lenses, as I imagine no one wants to let them go! So, keep out a diligent eye and browse every used lens site you can. I got mine off of usedcameras.com. I will keep an eye out as well and give you a heads up if I see anything! I will be posting a sample or two tonight when I return from the museum =)</p>

<p>Hey all!<br>

So I just received my used 50mm 1.7SMC-FA in the mail and whoa...though it aint cosmetically the prettiest thing there ever was...for about the same price as a Nikon 50 1.8 I cannot believe the quality of this thing. It feels like a sold hunk of lens that could withstand world war III. I did a couple of tests with it and it is really darn sharp even wide open! I am going to take this to the Getty tomorrow and I will hopefully have some pics to post on Sunday. Go Pentax! =).</p>

<p>Hi John,<br>

I hope you didn't misunderstand what I was saying. I actually like the Pentax files better for the very reason you do...the resemblance to film =). It's what I have shot solely til this year so I am used to it...it is comfortable and I don't know... it just looks more real to me but this is just my personal preference... to each his/her own. I am really satified with my decision to purchase the K20D. Though law school will take up much of my time...the school is located in Malibu so I will definitely have my camera with me every day for study breaks!</p>

<p>Oh and just to clarify, when I said the lens was soft in the corners I wasn't refering to the out of focus portions in that image specifically...I tested it out shooting a wall (yay walls!) haha. And it was a little soft in the corners but it sharpened up around F8 which I am pretty sure is normal for most cheaper zooms.</p>

<p>I focused on that flower in the back to the left</p>

<p>Okay so I went out and shot a couple test images at ISO3200 and I am happy to report that the effect is hardly present. I don't even know if it actually exists in real shots since the image looks uniformally grainy with a greater amount in shadows regardless of their orientation in the frame (normal). Since I won't be shooting too much at ISO 3200 I don't think this will be a huge problem for me. I am posting a sample...even at ISO 3200 I like the look of the Pentax files better than the Nikon files. It is just a personal thing for me but (sans the chroma noise) they remind me of film files...I guess it is just what I am used to. Hey Seurat didn't get famous by applying noise reduction to his pointalist paintings ;). Plus the 18-55 is dang sharp in the middle...even though the corners are pretty soft wide open...I gotta say that is quite a performance for a kit lens! Thank you again to all who contributed. Now that I am not so worried it's happy fun picture taking time! =)</p><div></div>

<p>You had to post food images Javier!!! I am starving...your images look delicsious mmmmm =)</p>

<p>I completely agree. Once I am happy I am happy. Thanks for understanding Javier. I noticed that you have a couple K20Ds as well... is this camera behavior I am experiencing normal? The link from PentaxForums seems to indicate that I am not alone. By the way Javier, I love your street photography. I live close to the LA area and I recognize a lot of the places you photograph! You really nailed the LA experience with your photos. Great great stuff Javier. <br>

Also one quick question. What is the specific day of the picture of the week. Can't wait to contribute! </p>

<p>Haha, I hear you Somanna. I can't say I am proud of this affliction. I don't enjoy it much either. I just want to make sure that everything is a-ok as a new camera is a pretty big investment for a first year law student who is techincally owned by money lenders! I totally deserve the banter too...I mean I kind of laught at it myself. Thank your for being so light hearted =). I look forward to contributing to the forum in the years to come!</p>

<p>Hello all,<br>

I was shown a link to this thread on Pentaxforums and it shows the exact issue I am having.<br>

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/67532-how-use-k20s-black-pixels-hidden-dngs.html<br>

I am guessing from this thread that this is a normal occurance in the K20D. I am going out now to shoot a bit and I will post some of the results for review. Thanks!</p>

<p>Hi Miserere and John,<br>

Miserere I know what you mean by the screen looking blank black. On on of my monitors it looks straight black and the problem is hard to see. On my laptop screen it is pretty clear. But yes, I agree with you about liking Pentax's approach to noise. I was a b&w film shooter and though I knew I could ultimately coax something like film from my nikon I liked Pentax's approach much better =).<br>

John,<br>

I tried the test again with the viewfinder covered...same result =(. Does this mean something is wrong? I hope not. I am in love with the way this camera handles and feels...low ISO image quality is outstanding. Though I will rarely shoot at high ISOs and will probably never shoot too many frames with the lens cap on =P, this is quite an investment and i just want to make sure my camera does not have a deffective problem that will get worse and worse and require me to send it in.<br>

Thank you both for your quick responses!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Success!</p>

<p>Hi john,<br>

I have been having problems uploading the picture. I will try it again =)</p><div></div>