gatorgums

I posted a question just a few days ago about the 28 pk 3.5 manual

not performing up to snuff.

I thought it was me or the lens. Wrong.

I returned the camera and asked one of the sales persons if

he had ever had any complaints about the k100D performance.

I mentioned that the images were not good at all

and i had to spend eons of time making adjustments.

It turns out, and here is the punchline, that some pentax k100d models had

sensors that were blown or whatever to begin with and that there was no remedy

short of a replacement of the whole camera.

I ended up being give a brand new K100D - SUPER to replace that lousy

discouraging 100D with the greenish sensor!

There are two issues known to k100 D cams, ( at least two, maybe more ).

They are the 1 degree shift phenomena and the faulty sensor resulting in washed

out looking dull and horribly out of hue pics fault.

Here l had thought it was my lens, a Tokina 80-200 f4.5 cheapo that DOES

give very good good results, despite being a dog better left at the Kennel,

(pawn shop) , where it was hastily purchased in a moment of mental

As soon as l popped that barker on the new k100d Super out popped the colors the

way they were supposed to have and the way l was led to assume they would,after

having read numerous good reports affirming same.

BTW, the pk 28 3.5 now performs up to snuff.

Well all of your comments and opinions are interesting and very helpful so far,thanks.

To be honest, l was used to just pointing and shooting with a, sorry to profane this Pentax forum, Canon A610 5mpx cam and out would come a bright clear shot under normal conditions.

This is not about comparisons though so l will just stick to the topic.

A few comments stuck out, just in general.

I have mostly been shooting in jpg high with normal to bright value.

Yes, when l have tried raw, there is more lattitude to extract a good image from the data, but it is very SLOWWWWWWWWWW USING THE PENTAX raw converting software! ( this may be more a result of my cpu ).

I appreciate the comment about the cropping to 100% ; that is true, but l do believe that as has been noted, a better lens may give better results .

I was just surprised that , as l have said, such a great 28mm k lens for film would have different results with digital.

To be fair, l have also been using a lousy Tokina 80-200 f 4.5 lens that was smudgy even when l used it with film. By that l mean the resolution was just acceptable but not great even when stopped down and NOT fully extended.

I will have to give the camera some more time and maybe a better lens would give better results.

Is it true that say a Pentax 200 f4 , which has been much raved about despite being from another era, would give just as stunn9ing results with this pentax K100D?

I am basing the "raved about" on the comments made about it on Stans Pentax site .

What l need to know is this;

Should l hold onto this Camera with the assurance that a better lens, whether a new auto focus Pentax or a second party lens such as a reasonably affordable consumer level Sigma, would give noticeably better results straight out of the camera, and even better results after i have adjusted levels, noise, etc., to my own preference?

To me 400 or 500 dollars is a lot of money!

That is not pocket change to be wasted on anything.

I am saying this in regard to Boris's comments about using a professional camera verses the one l have.

Thanks .

I just purchased a new K100D.

I have what has been a very contrasty and excellent

performing SMC-K manual focusing 28mm f3.5 lens.

I am finding the performance of this lens on the K100D

to be relatively diminished, in terms of

contrast , resolution and sharpness.

It is nice to have the 1.5 magnification factor, but it seems that

even in good outdoor light, even when using say f8 to f16, and having focused

carefully, the result when used to crop in at 75to100% is rather fuzzy and

indistinct. This is when l use that lens to shoot a distant scene and have

focused on infinity and used a high f stop.

Is there a reason, in any of your experiences with

manual k mount lenses, which would mirror this, and if

so, does anyone have any suggestions for a remedy?

It is very disappointing.

Thanks

Thanks!

Folks, i would like to say i was just spoofing you,

but l am not! I couldn't believe my eyes when

l pulled out that camera and it was T3!

$4.99 Canadian took it. I quietly walked up to the

counter, poker -faced and coughed it up.(out)

It was underneath a pile of electrical junk on a shelf

What's funnier is that in the auction case

they had a Minolta Slr up for bids!

With the strap case manual etc!

I also was not spoofing in asking if it was worth keeping.

As i said, i have heard some negative comment on the focusing,

but i suspect that in extreme reflective light or

low contrast situations it may have difficulty.

But that just means to be carefull with what, when and how you choose your subject and lighting.

I don't think there are many p&s's that can do it all annyway.<div></div>

Hello there .....

I found a Yashica T3 Super in great condition at a thrift store for $5.

The price is obviously not an issue, but l have heard that some people say it

does not focus well.

I also heard some good comments.

Is this series of yashica "t" s worth keeping, as opposed to say the T4

or T5?

Thanks!

done get to be sucker- lots say one thing

but is turn out no goood

ONE OF MANY LINKS ON THE TOPIC....

http://www.journalofaphotographer.com/workflow_tutorials/tutorial_converting_color_images_to_black_and_white.php

Simply desaturating or converting to grayscale

does not give you much control over things like the

saturation or tonal variants that YOU want in the picture.

ONE way (not the only way by any means)is to open up photoshop or a similar editor.

Convert the image to grayscale then adjust levels, curves etc., to suit yourself.

You can also open up the channels ( showing red green and blue)

window box.

Deselect all but the blue channel. (... take your curser and "uncheck"

the red and green "eyes" next to each red /green colour box, so that only one colour in the image ( blue) is visible.

Go and under layers, choose new layer adjustments, and then choose " curves, LUMINOSITY.

Adjust only the brightness or darkness of the image, also known as the tonal range, of the blue scale image or colour image.

Move the curves line with your curser until you have the

light dark areas where you want them.

You can convert this as a grayscale now - or copy the origional and paste this over it.

Convert the origional to a grayscale and blend the new layer adjustment which you created to about 75-80%.

Flatten the image.

Voila.

Well thats true; the slower speed is a pitfall but i had planned to use the lens outside on sunny days and then to use 400 film.

I was just curious to see what the combo would bring.

The m42 135 tak would be great and it is sharp. The only negative is it is just a bit too long for a walk around lens.

The other thing is i think it has a min focus distance of about 2 meters? 6 feet?

Thats' quite a ways, really.

I once had a 85 smc pentax but it was a barker.

I couldn't believe they could make such a lousy lens.

No contrast or rendition.

Got rid of it.

But thats about the right length, 85mm.

Oh for one of those big gun 85s with the large apertures!

Have to keep drinking beer for now though.

Well, they all seem like very good compositions to me.

I like the convergence - dog with puppy -best ;this is a

very good shot in my opinion.

Not so much the lens is good as your compositions- how you

used the lens. Very nice.

Thanks for all of your comments.

I'll give this some considerable thought based on all of this.

Would this screw mount combo even be worth trying?

I like the 100mm length it gives but maybe it would be so bad results that it

would not be worth it...

here it is:<div></div>

That is absolutely true, Patrick.

Wallyworld, most of the consumer developers do not want to adjust

anything now, they just spit them out.

A lot of folks are not into the ins and outs of

development and so all the counter person has to say is " ... sorry ma'mm, we can,y do anything about that, its just the picture..".

There are still the labs though. What a difference they can make.<div></div>

I had exactly the same situation with a different camera .

400 iso is ok except for a scene where you need detail in the highlights.

How can you get the lights without wasshing them out at 1/300-f16?

You can't except in the case where it is slightly overcast or hazy.

Then you can go f16 1/300 and you'll be ok.

Solution is to use 100 or 200 iso film and shoot f16 1/200 or 1/100

if on a very bright day and subject front lit.

I heard Acme Universal Camera Supply

has been bought out by You-Pay-Cheap-Now

(YPCN) of the PRC ,Guangdong Province, China.<div></div>

Thats a funny bit of writing.

I used a plastic spacer/washer cut from a nylon film canister to increase the pressure between rewind spool and camera body.

The metal had worn where the knob snaps down onto the body

and so the thing was a bit loose, allowing the film to back-wind.

basic setup was easy.<div></div>