y_lee

<p>I would wager you a large sum of money that whatever deficiency you see in your photography is entirely yours, and not the camera's. Either you are not a sufficiently skilled photographer, or you do not yet know how to properly operate your camera. I guarantee it -- I guarantee that anyone who knows what they're doing can take beautiful pictures with your K200d.<br>

But most out there with the same problem don't seem to believe this, believing instead that the next Brand, or the next Lens, or the next Camera, is the cure. As if photography -- and making beautiful photographs -- is just a matter of (1) buying the best camera they can afford, and (2) pressing the shutter button. Unforunately, it isn't as easy as that.<br>

So, good luck to you.</p>

Hi Hin --

Always good to hear from you.

Some people like collecting lenses and playing with cameras and tinkering with the mechanisms involved in the act of photography. You may well be one of them. If so, good for you and don't stop.

But if your principal interest regarding photography is creating beautiful images, then the answer is simple: Stop buying all these redundant & essentially useless (for you) lenses, and stop distracting yourself from the real task. We all know that the most difficult thing in photography is to create beautiful images. And most of us fail to do this most of the time. So, in order to escape the seeming impossibility of that act, and to avoid confronting our daily failures in that regard, many of us turn to easier tasks, such as collecting lenses or playing with lots & lots of cameras.

Just about anyone with a bit of money & an internet connection can collect lenses -- no artistic skill, talent or dedication is required. Similarly, even those not at all artistically capable can rap about technical details like noise, purple fringing, frames per second etc.

Again, I don't mean to judge -- everyone's different, and if gadgetry or collecting is your thing, more power to you. But if you are at all like me, you are likely using lens collecting or gadget fetishism as an easy diversion from the true task, that seemingly impossible-to-reach goal of capturing a once-in-a-lifetime image (which can of course be gotten with just about any ol' lens).

I still have way too many lenses. And I still divert myself from the true task by perusing silly forums like the ones on dpreview. But I try not to ... I really do ....

My 2 cents.

Quote: "I love pictures. I love the way certain lenses render pictures. I love the way the

Pentax 31mm, and the Voigtlander 125 APO-Lanthar render pictures. Both of these lenses

use 9 blade apertures. Therefore, I love pictures rendered with 9 blade apertures?

Am I on to anything here..?"

Er, no, at least not on this line of 'reasoning'. Do you love ONLY pictures rendered with

9-bladed lenses? And do you love ALL pictures rendered with 9-bladed lenses? If so,

then you might be 'on to' something -- for yourself -- but then I'd be a bit suspicious of

your taste in pictures. Surely there are pictures 'rendered' by non-9-bladed lenses that

are to your liking, and surely not all 9-blade rendrered photos are to your taste!

Seriously, though, my entirely non-technical hunch is that although the 9-blade thing has

something to do with why you like the rendering of a particular lens, it's just one aspect

of it. The FA43 ltd, the FA50 f/1.4, and the FA 100 macro all have 8 blades, e.g., and all

render beautifully.

Hi -- I'm another owner of both the K100 (my first DSLR) and the K10.

I would only repeat what has already been said above: Unless the small price difference (of $150 to $100 or so) really, really matters to you, get the K10. It's a much better camera. And if you get really into (or are already into) this photography thing, as most people here are, $150 or so is not a big deal -- a single quality lens is itself several times more than that.

That having been said, the K100 is a fine camera capable of doing just about anything a good photographer needs a camera to do. No bad choices.

I don't think you need to worry about Sigma THAT much more than other manufacturers -- maybe just a bit more. I've read plenty of QC problems with Pentax lenses (e.g., issues with the new DA* 16-50; front- or back- focusing with the 21 Ltd & the FA 50; de-centering with the FA35 etc.), as well as Tamron lenses. (I don't recall this kind of complaint with Tokina lenses, though that may simply be because fewer people have them).

It's always a tiny bit of a crapshoot, and always better if you can test the lens in-store before taking it home. And I believe that it varies more by the particular lens, rather than the particular manufacturer. I've heard fewer problems about the Sigma 10-20mm than other Sigmas (e.g., the 20mm f/1.8 seems to have more QC problems)

To add to the too-small sample size, my subjective experience with Sigma is the new 18-50mm f/2.8 macro and the 24mm f/1.8. Both of mine function just fine -- though as one poster already noted, I'm not sure how they'll handle in the long-run. Like everything else in life, it's a compromise -- you pay a good deal less for comparable IQ, but perhaps less in build quality and perhaps sketchier quality control.

Hmm. Would "fast enough", or "It's not an issue", suffice as an answer? I suspect not, given your listing of the D80's "specs" down to the 1/100 of a second.

Seriously, though, maybe someone can educate me on this -- what difference would a few hundreds of a second make regarding shutter lag or start-time? Under what circumstance would one notice the difference?

Hin --

With your constant changing of old lenses, I am looking forward to your next series of posts: How to remove dust from your sensor on the cheap!

BTW - I too have a wide-flanged Vivitar 28mm (but a fast one -- f/2) that needs fixing that I am not capable of doing ....

Oh, good lord -- who cares if Hin's got ads on his blog(s)! Are those nickles coming out of your pocket?

He's obviously a nice guy (even if somewhat deranged :) .....