hnl_imaging

<p>All fairly good points. <br> I do whole heartedly agree with the film analogy, though I have slowed down the frame # on digital quite a bit over the last few years it is still cheaper. <br> In researching Nikon over the past few days it has been interesting to see that, depending on where you look, their service stinks to. Thom Hogan also almost paints the picture of them possibly going out of business or maybe severely cutting or cutting out altogether DSLRs and lenses. Pentax forums also made the future of Nikon and possibly even Canon, look not so bright while apparently Pentax/Ricoh sales are actually up just a bit in the last couple of years. It really does depend on the data you are getting and where you get it.<br> I may have to get used to the somewhat broken K200D for a while till I can sort things out. The internet makes everything look bad in one way or another... </p>

<p>Great to hear! <br> Some of the stuff on the net may be false/ inaccurate. Its hard to say. As to the number of incidents with the K3 mirror issues I have seen that reported on Dpreview, Steve Huff, and Pentax forums by what seems like a number of people. I have also heard that Pentax offers a firmware "fix" that sort of fixes the problem, so that is nice. <br> The K1000 issue I mentioned was only brought up by one guy who was supposedly a repair guy who was talking about why he wouldn't buy pentax, the same guy also mentioned a few other issues but that one stuck due to my experience. He did say that canon and nikon both had some issues as well. <br> Again, its good to hear that maybe it is all just a small and somewhat loud minority that make a big deal about a few things. I really didn't want to end up going out and trying to buy a new set of lenses. </p>

<p>Harry, the issues I have been concerned about are regarding the many places that I keep seeing that the higher end Pentax cameras usually suffer, at least to some extent, by some rather interesting quirks such as the "mirror-flapping" on the K3 (I believe I have also heard this about the K5ii on the website of some professional photographer...) and a couple of other models now. Sensor staining on the K5 and, again, possibly some others. I have not heard so much bad about their cheaper bodies. The SDM motor failure I guess has been fixed... I just keep finding this odd stuff. I had a K1000, the winder was always a bit sticky and when you rewound the film, sometimes the dial wouldn't go back to zero so you had to coax it along... even with bran new batteries occasionally the light meter was off by 1/2-1 1/2 stops and others it just worked, with the same lens ( and no I am not talking about not being able to adjust for reflectance of the subject...). After doing some research, it seems like the K1000 had/has a very good reputation, but also has these little issues like the gear in the winder were apparently under designed and were known to have problems. The SDM motor thing was probably the same thing, under engineering parts, putting in what will barely or usually get you by with little or no "factor of safety." <br> All that aside, the things that really concern me are 1) in almost every case where someone has had an issue after the 14-30 standard return policy of most retail places, getting Pentax to fix it is either very difficult or very time consuming (like months...), 2) Yes, people complain about Nikon, say the D7000/7100 was brought up by a guy on DPreview (or maybe Steve Huff's website...) when some one else brought up a concern about his K3. If you look up the problems with that camera, a lot of it is focus issues that seem to be readily fixable. In the same vain, some one brought up the dreaded Canon error signal that shuts down the camera. This is an issue that I have actually had, twice, the first time was because the Sigma lens I was using was apparently not compatible with my 30D and wouldn't play well with it. The second was because I took a cheap 50/1.8 to the Dubai on my second deployment and it got full of sand and wouldn't play nice with my camera. The problem is usually due to something simple or fixable and Canon/ Nikon seem to be better on the service end. But Pentax seems have more serious problems. So its scary! <br> In any case, the first frames I took with my K1000, on cheap fuji superia from walmart, were amazing color wise. Same with the K200D. The lenses have this great color and feel. Even the 18-55 WR, which after owning one I decided was given a bit tooo much praise, looks outstanding until you get right down to the detail. I would say that is all kit lenses but I had to borrow my mother in laws rebel/ kit lens one time, the canon 18-55 is really bland/boring, but generally sharper than the pentax... The two limiteds I have are great color wise, the 20-40 is unreal for detail and 3D rendering, my 70/2.4 is well... kind of rough in my opinion. Just tried it again today. The K35/3.5, M100/2.8, M50/4 macro are all really great. Even the M50/2 (great color and can be pretty darn sharp) and the Super Takumar 135/2.5 (non-smc) which every one thinks are so bland have given me some of nicest looking photographs of my wife and daughters (when they hold reasonably still or I get lucky) that I have taken with any lens. <br> So I really don't want to give up on them. I am just having a hard time that when ever I go to read about a new camera body that I would be interested in, there seems to be some serious issue with that followed by a serious issue with customer support. Every store I have talked to in CO says the same thing, "we would (or did) carry Pentax, but we can't even get them to call us back or send us stock..." which sounds somewhat familiar to the customers sending in K3s with mirror issues and either getting, "I don't see a problem," or no response for months some times then they get it back fixed, usually.<br> So it is good to hear that some are not having a bunch of issues!</p>

<p>Thanks, I was getting some unclear info on weather the AF was really that much improved from the 30D on. I did finally get to handle the 70D in a store and from looking at the LCD (I know, not perfect...) and handling it, it feels really quite nice. It's quite a bit more than am able to spend at the moment however. I was looking more at 30-50D's used. I put the original 7D out due to the extra inconvenience of paying more for a body as well as for CF cards, all of mine I gave away... It also seems like they are well on their way out... <br> As far as lenses go, i was looking to start out again with a 35/2. Mainly because its fast, not unreasonably expensive, offers pretty decent IQ, and i have had this yearning desire to take what some of the old timers say to heart and just use one fixed normalish focal length for a while... I would really like to augment that with a 20/2.8 and either an 85/1.8 or 100/2 as soon as I have the cash. I realized, through my pentax experience, that as much as I used to like that 24mm (on full frame 5D or film) focal length that the ~ 30mm equivalent lens allows me to do quite a bit with out as much distortion. I have gotten to where I even prefer 40-60mm equivalent for many landscapes here in CO as it doesn't make the mountains seem so small and insignificant. The 100/2.8 I had was almost perfect except I usually found it a bit to long for trying to work with my girls. I sold it and got a 70/2.4 but pentax's 70mm = ~60mm which is still a little too short in many situations so I am thinking of the 85/1.8 pretty seriously. </p> <p>Thanks again for the input. </p>

<p>Douglas, Awesome... <br> I have found that the iphone, though seriously limited in some ways, can actually be quite good. I would rather go for a full sized camera but I admit to using the iphone pretty frequently as well. It replaced my wife's camera altogether. </p>

<p>interesting... that hyper program mode sounds kind of neat. <br> I am one of those largely self taught photographers. I learned off of the old Ansel Adams books and the old national geographic field guides, the ones that were out before digital was really to far along. After I learned about setting those the parameters I never really did anything else, except with my phone. My brother in law, who has a bit more training than I do, swears by aperture priority so I gave that a shot under his recommendation and just never could get in the groove with it. I may have to try the hyper program thing though. Now that my K200 is permanently set in one of those modes it may be worth trying to get used to giving up some of the manual control until I get a new body. <br> I know I am possibly beating a dead horse, but I found a couple of slightly used K5ii's for a decent price. I am having a hard time with the customer service/ reliability of gear issues still. My wife is kind of convinced that I would be throwing away money by continuing on with Pentax, however, its so hard to part with my 20-40. The 70 ltd I'm on the fence about... may not have enough experience with it yet, I just bought it before the camera started acting up so it hasn't seen too much use. <br> You suppose that the company is worth sticking with? the gear reliable and possible to get fixed if I run into one of the issues? </p>

<p>Interesting...<br> I was thinking about asking if any other bodies had the same kind of issues with long exposures in another post. <br> Thanks for the tip. </p>

<p>Michael, its funny that you should mention the body differences... I came to Pentax primarily due to monetary reasons. I used to use Canon gear. I ended up having to sell all of it, a 1N, 30D, 10D, 5D and a few lenses, and tried to live with just a point and shoot for a couple of years. <br> The G15 I bought ended up being a pretty great little camera in many respects, however, it seems like the designers of point and shoot cameras purposefully dumb down the cameras either to make you wish you had an SLR or possibly due to some hardware constraints. I feel like most of it would be the later... It was a great learning experience. <br> I got into Pentax because I couldn't part with the lenses and film gear my dad gave me (all pentax stuff...) and the pentax bodies worked with the old manual lenses. So I bought a cheap, very well used k200d from keh. It has been an outstanding little camera. I have 3, well now 4, little issues with it.<br> First, prefocusing with manual lenses is actually faster and some times less irritating than the autofocus... <br> Second, i really hate not having separate controls for aperture and shutter speed. <br> Lastly, I think that this is mostly due to the AA batteries or maybe its a Pentax thing... Trying to do a 15-30 second exposure locks the K200 up for a LONG time. <br> Lastly, somehow, the modes all got switched around, night scene mode now resides in 3 places on the dial, manual mode (which i use exclusively...) is now sensitivity priority or some such garbage, program mode has 2 places, etc... I took my camera out one day after I hadn't picked it up in a few weeks and realized that I didn't have the info i was used to in the viewfinder display and couldn't figure out why. I started playing with it and its a bit quirky. All modes but aperture priority are stuck in auto ISO and I cant get them out. Manual mode doesn't exist (which makes this camera almost useless for how I shoot). SO I have been trying unsuccessfully to get by with aperture priority, which is kind of like skipping around in circles on one foot with your hands tied to a car traveling the opposite direction. <br> But the IQ is pretty great. Overall it feels great. <br> I really would like to get back into a body that was more like my 5D or 1N. No stupid scene modes, good auto focus (well the 1N had that... not so much the 5D...), easy to use controls, and the best view finder I can get. View finders, I found , are critical. The smaller cameras have 2 real problems- the view finders are too small and dim, and the controls are only half there. </p>

<p>David, thanks for the input. Good to know that the 7D isn't that usable above ISO 800. I was looking at that assuming that it had decent high ISO capability (though 800 isn't that bad... ) and would be quicker in terms of auto-focus than my 30D or my 5D, both of which I remember being slightly behind my 1N... I wasn't too worried about the frame rate so much as being able to lock focus quickly and accurately. <br> The brand switch was not originally intended to happen, it ended up being more out of convenience and finances at the time. When I decided I needed another SLR Pentax was all I could afford to get into due to having lenses for it already. If I could trust the product, I would probably stay with them. Cameras just cost too much to get a lame duck that you almost can't get fixed. <br> Would the 60D provide adequate auto- focus speed/ accuracy to deal with kids in average interior light? Say usually where I would set ISO 400 at f2-2.8 and 1/30th-1/60th of a second. <br> Is ISO 1600 pretty usable?</p>

<p>Thanks for sharing the experiences/ encouragement. It has been quite difficult trying to decide if I should break away from Pentax. Good to know that there are some happy K3 owners</p>

<p>has any one had any dealings with the Pentax customer service?</p>

<p>Yeah, sifting through the garbage is quite difficult...<br> I am only really getting rid of the K200 because it developed some interesting quirks that impact its usefulness when my daughter pulled it off the table a few months back... but an upgrade at the same time would be nice.<br> Do you see any real differences between your pentax and nikon gear as far as reliability/ useability?<br> What about lens quality</p>

<p>Have K200 which has developed some rather odd problems. <br> Would love to get K3, K5II or possibly even K50 as replacement, however, I am a little concerned about the reliability of any of them with all the various possible issues that I am seeing coming up with them. <br> I am also desiring better autofocus speed and high ISO capability from the K200. My main subjects are 2 and 4 year old kids and landscapes... the kids are fast and often indoors. ISO 400 is questionably acceptable on K200, 800 is pretty bad usually. Would like to do better. <br> I only have 2 lenses, the 20-40 ltd and the 70 ltd. I am really attached to the 20-40 and so-so about the 70 so far. Either way they are better than the entry level lenses from Canon and Nikon so I would like to keep them...<br> But I have been considering going back to Canon or going to Nikon for a fix to all of the above issues as well. I would really like to keep that Pentax look and my lenses though. <br> Is the Pentax reliability or product quality really as bad as it looks like it is on the various forums? Is it worth taking a risk with a K3 or K5II/s? possibly a K50?</p>

<p>Hello, at one point in time I have owned or used a number of Canon bodies and lenses... the 10D, 30D, 5D, 1N, A2, a couple of L series zooms and a couple of primes. I made what was probably a poor decision a few years back to sell all of it because it wasn't getting used once I returned to college, the batteries weren't aging well and I thought it would be best if I purchased a smaller camera that I could keep with me more and some one else could use the gear that was laying around my house rotting... <br> A couple of years with a G15 and I was ready to move on to something else. I had a few old manual focus pentax lenses and decided to give their digital bodies a go. I then purchased 2 of their limited lenses and was fairly happy with the set up, until my camera started acting flaky and I started looking at getting another newer body. All the new pentax stuff seems to have a possibly high percentage of weird issues such as mirror flap, focus problems, the sensor "stain" problems... More than that, they apparently have slow or poor customer service. <br> SO I am looking at possibly getting back into Canon, or possibly nikon. That being said, I have been looking at getting a used 7D with a 35/2 or possibly a new or used d7000 with a 35/1.8G. A pentax K3 still looks like a nice option if I could be one of the lucky ones with no issues... <br> I mainly want to be able to photograph my kids, my G15 has a hard time keeping up with them. I would like decently fast autofocus. I don't remember my 30D being that great with autofocus speed or that great above ISO 400, generally I only liked the 5D above 400... <br> I really hate the lack of separate controls for aperture and shutter speed, so I am not <em>really</em> interested in rebels. I also use the top LCD screen quite a bit to check settings and occasionally I will guess my exposure settings, so not having to look at the screen in the rear is nice. <br> I don't care much for video or wifi, gps, etc... <br> I guess my questions are; is the autofucus of the new X0D bodies much improved over the 30D?<br> Is the 7D worth the money compared to say a used 50/60D or even a newer/ similar Nikon?<br> I've heard a couple of conflicting stories about the high ISO performance between the 30D and the 50/60D, are the last 2 or the 7D significantly better? <br> Any other thoughts or advice you might be willing to give?</p> <p>Thanks</p> <p> </p>

John, thanks. That is what I was looking to find out.

Thanks for the response. Not to argue with that last assessment that the camera could be to blame, but with my 20-40 ltd my k200 is pretty fast. I even put that lens on in the store to compare and see if I was imagining things. The 20-40 was not only faster, but would actually achieve focus lock. I guess what I am getting at is if the FA series lenses, even the top notch lenses, can be expected to behave like this. I am well aware of the manual focus issues, I just sold 5 legacy lenses in hopes of purchasing one really decent auto focus lens. I used those lenses almost exclusively for almost 2 years... I know that, from a bit of experience with my manual lenses, that I can usually get a decent shot off were as with the 100/ 2.8 wr macro and the 50/1.7 in a daily well lit store, I couldn't actuate the shutter. I wanted to know if that was going to be an issue with the 77/ 1.8 as well. My experience with canon gear has been very different in general, but it seems that manually focusing autofocus lenses is possible, maybe better, but not really better than legacy lenses on pentax. Pentax seems about the same in this regard... At any rate, during the middle of the day, in a store with large windows, iso=400, shutter=1/60, aperture=2.8, I should be able to focus plenty easily. My canon 20-35/2.8 would have, my 50/1.4 or 1.8 would have, the 24/2.8 usm would have, and my 20-40 does. With in some limits, my legacy lenses did, but not really fast or always perfectly accurate. Can I expect the 77/1.8 to act like the 20-40 ltd or my canon gear, or is there another equivalent lens option?

<p>I am wondering if any one could compare the auto focus speed of the FA 77/1.8 and the FA 50/1.7. I have no hands on experience with the 77/1.8, but was able to look at a used 50/1.7 in a store yesterday. I had a very hard time getting it to lock focus on my 2 year old, even when she wasn't moving too much. It did seem to lock on ok when the subject was completely stationary. I am looking for something to photograph my girls with and they move... I have been thinking that the 77/1.8 or the 70/2.4 would be a good replacement for my smc-m 100/2.8, which I generally liked but was having a hard time photographing my girls with, I thought because of the focus (my focus...) speed. So I wanted to replace it with an auto focus lens.<br> With what I saw yesterday, I may be better off going back to manual focus if the 77/1.8 is as difficult to work with as the 50/1.7. <br> Any input or suggestions?<br> Thanks</p>

<p>I finally got a chance to make some prints... cheap prints from costco... At any rate, in print, I definitely see a difference between the medium format with Portra 160 and 135 of the same film. Some photographs of my girls, the scans look kind of bad, but the prints actually look quite good at 8x10. I had some prints I also printed a shot that was done with the 645 on panf 50 and also on my K200D with a limited series lens. The results are kind of interesting, the film image does seem to have a bit better sharpness and tonality is better, it displays quite a bit more grain however. I spent quite a bit of time looking at medium format images in various places last night and I'm noticing that I seem to be getting quite a bit more grain from any of my films than many seem to be getting. I am wondering if there is a way to lessen this? I have also seen very good results from Epson V500, 550, 600, and 700 scanners on the web. ( I actually have a few rather large prints from 35mm film that were scanned with one, but the guy I had print them was a very good fine art reproduction printer...). <br> Is there some good method of exposing the film and/or working with a lab to get a more dense negative?</p>

<p>Dave Henderson, I really like your gallery! Wish I could do even an 8th of the quality of work you do! and that has been one of my problems, getting the time and ability to perfect the lab processes is beyond what I can do at the moment so i would definitely get worse results than I am with a lab. Unless for some reason learning that flatbed scanner is really of some use... </p>

<p>Robin, yes, that is the idea. I was really looking for a difference in perspective that I have been led to think was due to the physical size of the lenses and recording medium. I also wanted the different format and view finder... In reality for the last bit I should have gone with a 6x6 TLR or Hassleblad but I couldn't afford it. The 645 still has a bigger view finder than my aps-c or 35mm, at least it seems to.<br> I know you can just use a tripod. I have actually been doing this. I was hoping for the depth you get. I see a lot of hassleblad b&w stuff that looks like you could actually talk to the person in the image, it just has a depth that I assumed was in the optics not so much the resolution... It didn't look as compressed as the 35mm stuff I am used to seeing that looks so ordinary. Is there a way to get that kind of look?</p>

<p>David, thanks.<br> Alan, those are some of the reasons why I actually still use film at all, and why I bought the 645. I was really thinking that in some ways, the different shooting experience would push my way of seeing and working a bit. I almost wanted to do LF but my wife and kids don't have that kind of patience. Unfortunately I only get to shoot when on vacation. I use my P&S for everyday snapshots. And you are right, at least by my eye there is a magenta type color cast to the MF photo. I took the same shot on my K200 with a smc 35/3.5 lens which showed a much more pronounced color cast than the film shot does. I put images up straight off the scans from the lab. </p>

<p>Jose Angel, those comments are kind of what I was interested in... the comments about "its more about an issue with your shooting technique..." I am wondering if it was just that I needed more time to practice with the gear or if I would always get the same kind of results no matter what. If you could point out some things you are seeing that I should work on that would great!<br> I keep seeing a lot of "use a tripod" and "you have to do it yourself (with the printing etc...). First I did use a tripod for all but 2 frames on the 4 rolls of film I've put through it so far. The second issue is a bit bigger. My wife actually bought me a dark room kit, though it's suited more towards 35mm, which I never got the chance to use as I was never home long enough and the chemicals were difficult to get. Now I have kids and I'm really busy, basically I don't have time to get really into the darkroom AND my wife doesn't want the chemicals around the kids...Unfortunately the closest I can come to doing it myself is scanning on an Epson flatbed and having the processing done by some other lab. Hopefully the scans would provide a file that I could mess with in Lightroom iff needed. <br> <br /><br /></p>

<p>I am wondering, compared to the 35mm if this really seems that much different.</p><div></div>

<p>guess that didn't work</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p><img src="/photo/18061877" alt="" /><br> Forgive my horrible photography, but this is what I am getting from the ME super with a 35/3.5.<img src="/photo/18061876" alt="" /><br> these other two are from the 645, both from a tripod.<br> <img src="/photo/18061873" alt="" /></p>