david_russell8

<blockquote>

<p>Or maybe Sigma doesn't care what the others charge and they simply price their lenses according to what the finance department says.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Would make more sense than the "think of a reasonable number, then double it" games that Pentax play :P</p>

<p>Aside from the difference in maximum aperture, the f2 version is supposed to be noticeably inferior in other quality terms than the f1.7 and f1.4 at the same apertures.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The reason some of us want that Tokina 11-16mm is for the constant f/2.8 aperture and weather-sealed construction.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Plus it's (even) sharper than the DA 12-24mm.</p>

<p>I currently have a Crumpler Muffin Top 4000, which (just) holds my K20D and the two kit zooms. My problem is that I now have a flashgun and another lens, and might well have more kit in the future. I was thinking of getting a Tamrac 5535 (aka "Adventure 5") as it seems to be about the size I'm looking for (ie will hold my existing stuff plus possibly another lens or two). The one thing that's concerning me is how waterproof it is. I have a Timbuk2 messenger bag (regrettably the Domke inserts are horrifically expensive here in the UK, so I can't just use that) and I have had it out in torrential rain without anything getting inside. I'm assuming that the Tamrac won't be as good as that?</p>

<p>Also, if anyone knows of reasonably-priced (in the UK) messenger bag inserts then could you post links? I'd really like to do that if possible, mainly for the comfort of using a bag type I'm comfortable with rather than any supposed 'less obvious to thieves' benefits.</p>

<p>Just to offer a K20D anecdote (the tech specs are readily available from the various review sites):</p>

<p>I bought myself a K20D earlier this year in part to celebrate the completion of my degree (and in part because I'd been thinking about it since the middle of last year and got wind of the massive price hikes which were coming in June). So of course on graduation day I hand it over to my folks (complete with the kit lens, and in Av mode) so that they could take photos of me in gown and assorted elements (I didn't want posed shots from the official studio). What I forgot about was the fact that I had been taking some indoor shots the night before and the camera was thus set to ISO 1600. Cue a collection of shots at ISO 1600 and 1/2000 or 1/4000 of a second (it was a very un-Scottish stiflingly hot and sunny day!). Despite that, they are mind-blowing: sure, there is some visible noise when you zoom right in with Lightroom, but in the 8x10 prints I have sitting across from me now? Not a sniff.</p>

<p>So, quite apart from all the enjoyment it's given me in recreational photography, the K20D is the camera which saved my graduation photos from my own idiocy!</p>

<p>The Pentax 16-50mm DA* does have a reputation for producing great images, but <em>bear in mind</em> that it also has something of a reputation for the SDM focus motor failing (in fact there are murmurings about Pentax's SDM in general - with varying opinions as to whether it's a Big Deal or not) whereas as far as I'm aware the Tamron 17-50mm doesn't have any reported systemic reliability issues. I've not heard a great deal about the Sigma (and do not own any of the three - just reporting the words of others).</p>

<p>The Conventional Wisdom (that again) holds that colour laser printers are stellar for business documents/graphics, but hopeless for photos.</p>

<p>As far as K/M42 goes, the Russian primes have surprisingly good reputations (especially some of the Helios designs, which have some WWII-related connection to Zeiss designs that I can never remember properly). Besides, it's the radioactive Super Takumars you have to worry about :P</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I hope it will look better than this...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Am I the only person on the planet who LOVES the harlequin?</p>

<p>Since it's getting into sunset season, I thought I'd look at getting myself some nd grad filters. I'm aware of the colour cast issue with Cokin's grads, so I thought I'd go for Hi Tech which seem to have a slightly better reputation in this regard without costing the earth. Apparently their filters will fit Cokin's P series holders - is this true? From the pictures I've seen of the Hi Techs they look significantly taller than the Cokin filters.</p>

<p>I'm looking at getting a Cokin P series filter holder (and some filters to put in it, of course :P), but I'm confused about which size I should get. I've read a couple of sites which say that to avoid vignetting wider than 20mm or so you should get the 'wide angle' version of the holder. Like most beginners most/all of my landscape photos will be taken with my 18-55mm kit lens. Do I need the wide-angle holder for that? I'm confused as to whether the FOV crop factor is relevant: should I 'count' my lens as being 28mm (it's Pentax so 1.5x crop) - ie suitable for the standard holder that comes with the Cokin starter kits - or 18mm ie requiring the wide-angle holder?</p>

<p>Those are fairly mild compared to the price increases in the UK. Several lenses more than doubled in price (e.g. FA 50mm f1.4 was £175, now > £400)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>For a really good cheapie closeup lens, Robin is right. The same lens was also offered in a Pentax branded AF version, which should not cost much used.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If I can find one of the Pentax ones over here then that sounds like a plan. I don't have the eyesight for MF to be honest :P</p>

<p>Knew there was something I'd missed out! Both of these are apparently 1:2, however if as suggested above the 28-90 is 1:2.3 then I'd guess the 28-80 would be 'better' as far as the word can be used in distinguishing two very entry-level items</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I should mention that KEH appears to have the 28-80 in excellent condition for ~$25 and you can easily return it if you don't like it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks but I'm in the UK.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>For true macro work forget it; for closeups I would save my money for a true macro lens. Since you already have the Pentax kit lens, you are not purchasing any more optical improvements anyway, so why burden yourself with an additional lens?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hmm you might well be right - although most of my macro stuff would be in the "mucking about in the garden" sort of range from home, I probably would be happier waiting to get something specifically designed to do macro than another standard zoom (I love the kit lens to bits) which will only ever be used at its maximum focal length.</p>

<p>I got my K20D a few months ago thanks in part to advice on this forum (love it by the way!) and I'm looking at (just to play about with) buying one of the cheap Sigma macro zooms that seem to pop up on eBay quite a lot. The two of these seem to be 28-80mm and 28-90mm - both f3.5-5.6 and Aspherical Macro. Can anyone tell me what the difference between these two is (apart from the obvious focal length :P) and which of them is 'better'? (defined as 'better when used exclusively as a macro lens because I have two lovely Pentax kit zooms to do other stuff with' :P)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Lots of good advice here. Before I had the K20D I used a polariser to slow water a bit. Acts like a kind-of sort-of ND filter!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, polarisers reduce about 1 or 2 stops depending on the quality of the filter and the strength they're set to.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>David, another thing I forgot to mention is keep your ISO at 100. If you're going to be in dense forest, ISO 100 and F/11 should put the shutter speed to around 2s.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Cheers, although I'm not likely to be adventurous enough (or more to the point mobile enough) to get into forests for 'proper' waterfalls. I'll probably initially be restricted to breaking waves at the coast, and possibly running water if I can find a fast enough flowing stretch of water in Glasgow!</p>

<p>This process would be a lot simpler if there was a 'click here to fix the warm colours problem' Lightroom action supplied with all 10-stop NDs :P</p>

<p>I have a K20D with the (version II, non-WR) kit lens and one of the things I want to look into is 'smooth water'-type tricks with ND filters and rivers/waterfalls. Can anyone tell me how small an aperture I can go to on the kit lens without losing sharpness to diffraction? Just trying to work out what strength of ND to go for.</p>

<p>Good luck, get well soon :)</p>

<p>Hmm maybe a 6-stop would be better - I had completely forgotten about the viewfinder 'issue' :) I should also add that a 6-stop or 10-stop B+W would (at least in the UK) be about the same cost as a 3-stop from B+W or Hoya so I'll just go for whichever one is going to give the best effect.</p>

<p>I just got my DSLR, and since I have a bag and tripod organised I reckoned the next thing to sort out would be filters. The first of these will be the obligatory Hoya Pro1 CPL, and I'm also looking at getting an ND. Since my main (ie only that I can think of) use for it will be 'silky water', I was thinking of getting one of B+W's ND-110 (10 stop) filters. Does anyone have experience of using these - particularly the 'slightly stronger warm tone' compared to their weaker filters (this from the online store selling the things!) My thinking in going for a powerful (don't know the technical term :P) ND is that I will be able to get second-plus exposures without having to go to very small apertures and losing sharpness from diffraction.<br>

EDIT: Forgot my other main question: storage. Do these filters come with a hard case for safe storage in a camera bag, or will I have to buy one separately?</p>

<p>I've just a new shiny K20D and I'm aware that to be able to take it anywhere I'll need a bag to put it in. Somehow I wouldn't feel at ease just dumping it in the bottom of my Timbuk2 messenger bag. From my own incompetent research I've come to the Crumpler Muffin Top 3000 - does anyone have any experience of using these? The most I am ever likely to be carrying at once is the K20D + kitlens, a 50-200mm (don't have it yet, but I'll probably end up getting it), plus the odd old prime or two off evilbay. My main concern is waterproofing - being from the west of Scotland, the bag would have to be able to survive sudden monsoon-like rain on an otherwise sunny day. From the photos of the Crumpler I can't work out if it's made of that more-or-less-impervious ballistic nylon stuff or the fluffy cuddly (but non-very-waterproofy) fabric whose name escapes me :P</p>

<p>As so often happens on forums (both pleasing and irritating :P) my original question is long since answered and I'm happy, but it has now generated a brilliant general discussion.<br>

On the point of shutter shelflife, I agree with the suggestion above that they have largely become a commodity element of DSLRs. If we were being cynical we could conclude that this is because the shutter isn't a 'sexy' element which can be put in adverts to sell cameras. 'Brighter viewfinder', 'higher resolution screen', 'higher resolution sensor'. All of these are things which would encourage people to buy one maker's model over another. 'Our shutter will last 105,000 activations as opposed to our competitor's 100,000' wouldn't really :P</p>

<p>Cheers, that's what I thought. I'm just paranoid about these things :)</p>

<p>I just got my new K20D, and the shutter count (from Exiftool) on the first photo I took is 230. I'm aware that the shutter count on new ones is never 0 because of factory testing, is this a normal sort of figure? I'm assuming it is but just wanted to double-check :)</p>