Zvonimir Tosic: Ricoh to Pentax is now same as what Asahi Optical was to Pentax. Neither "invented" Pentax, but bought it. Remember the times when Asahi letters were *engraved* above the Pentax letters on every single pentaprism, on millions of cameras?At least Ricoh is more subtle and is signing off at the back of the camera. So read it as a signature: "We at Ricoh, now recognised as world leaders in sustainable technologies and brand stewardship, are proud to deliver to you this Pentax camera, made to excite you and exceed your expectations". Ricoh is recognised as one of most ethical companies in the world; please check your facts guys.
Actually The Asahi Optical Company Ltd. changed their name to Pentax in 1957 after their ground-breaking pentaprism reflex camera "The Pentax". AOCO started making lenses way back in 1919, only two years after Nikon and a decade before Canon.
atamola: Why, why?going over the specs... nice...nice... good... very good ... and bang! sync speed 1/180!! why Ricoh why?Just that point. Puzzling to me.
I agree with Brendon, even 1/250th is too slow for what I do. 1/500th would be helpful, but 1/1000th would be ideal. Maybe Pentax will address the problem with leaf shutter lenses, they've done it in their medium format cameras and in the Q via the K-mount adapter.
Unfortunately Pentax is about 10 years behind the times when it comes to flash. It might also surprise you to learn that they don't support "groups"/"zones" only channels, or that you need a flash on the hotshoe in addition to a remote flash to achieve wireless High Speed Sync.
Many users will never miss these features, but for a few, it's a real source of frustration on an otherwise well-designed camera system. I speak from experience.
Tell me again why I'd want to rent my software instead of owning it?
That silver DA15 is sexy as hell.
Remember all those folks last year who said the sky was falling on the DLSR market, and it's name was mirrorless?
photoramone: first, and formost, the pictures are a series of seasonal shots (note the green green grass, then the brown brown grass, etc.) Second, it is a compilation of photos of a much-loved DAUGHTER, cooperating with the photographer/father. How one could be nasty/critical, is beyound me.... I must say that all too often this forum is a display of hyper-ego ed and condescending comments by nare-do-well photographers, who think that "condescending to the rest of us, makes them look superior. It does not. and its the same nay-sayers every day.....So if ya can't say something nice or at least FAIR.....stay home
Because sometimes we need to be reminded that gear is the means, not the end.
John Siward: Lotta grumpy folk here today...
A lot of folks never learned to expose for the shadows.
Kim Letkeman: I am obviously waaaayyyyy out of tune with this thread .... these are amazingly creative and just plain cute. But technically, they are hard on the eyes. Yuck to the tone, color, and lighting for at least 3/4 of them. But hey ... what do I know.
They were shot on Portra 400 which is optimized for skintones, but tends to be a bit blue-deficient as a consequence. It also tends to have less punchy blacks in my experience. To me these shots just have a classic color negative look.
I work with seasoned models who don't show as much personality as this young lady. Too cute!
D1N0: Under water photo's can be corrected in lightroom. Maybe shoot some photo's in a swimming pool? Since a lot of people will use it for that? (Or will you get arrested for that nowadays?)
You have a good point, pevee. I do understand that the DR of a tiny sensor can't compare to that of an APS-C, let alone a full frame or larger sensor. For me, the desire for a waterproof camera that shoots RAW is as much about my workflow as it is image quality. Being able to re-interpret WB after the fact, color profiling with my ColorChecker Passport. The MX-1 can shoot in RAW, so why not a waterproof compact with the same sensor?
The color casts we're seeing in these images are correctable as JPEGs, but the results would be so much better with 12-bit RAW files. Why manufacturers haven't done this already boggles my mind. I don't care if it shoots 2 SPF (not a typeo), give me RAW and they will get my $$$, until then they're just throwing away R&D dollars as far as I'm concerned.
The graphic designer who created the above image probably should have thought things through a bit more, the last thing you want to see coming out of your underwater camera is air bubbles.
Bruce Lee called, he wants his jumpsuit back.
Finally! A camera with a mode dial that rotates 360 degrees! I can die happy.
I have to think it would be easier to train a photographer as a writer than to train a writer as a photographer, no offense meant.
Münchhausen: @ dpreview: Thanks a lot for this samples; I would like to see a report on the behaviour of the FA-Limiteds (like the 43 you used on the K-5II) on both K-5II and K-5IIs. My expierence, and you can read a detailed description at Klaus´photozone.de, is that the 43Lim isn´t very sharp from edge to edge on the original K-5 (very mushy corners at 2.8, no corners at all at 1.9, but excellent center sharpness), contrary to the K-7 and older models. One idea was that this was the fault of the more than fairly strong AA-filter on the K-5; but the samples with the 43Lim on the K-5II you posted seem better to me, even very acceptable or good at 2.8. If the K-5II has a weaker AA-filter than the K-5, than the FA-Limiteds should really shine on the K-5IIs...Would be nice to read your opinion!Best regardsM.
I don't own the lens myself, but I noticed a big discrepancy in sharpness between the two reviews on Photozone.de of the FA43 on the K10 vs. the K5. It could be that the pixels of the Samsung CCD (I think) used in the K10 are more forgiving of non-telecentric lens designs than the Sony sensor used in the K5. Or, more likely, Klaus just got a bad copy of the lens for his second review. Still, it is strange.
Of course the FA Limiteds were optimized for real-world scenes, not test charts, a certain amount of field curvature was intentionally left uncorrected. There is a very interesting paper written by the lens's designer, Hirakawa Jun, discussing the design philosophy behind the FA Limiteds. Particular importance was given to the transition from in-focus to out-of-focus regions. In my opinion that's what makes these lenses so special, and of course their size.
Uhhh so... just put the stolen lens on an older body?
Rick Knepper: PENTAX Announces Rebates on the Highly Acclaimed 645D System as well as on select Limited Lenses when purchased with its Flagship DSLR, the K-5 IIs
Unless I am reading this wrong, this statement does not seem to jive with the actual rebate verbiage on the website. These two cameras serve very different markets and seems illogical to tie the purchase of one to the other.
Methinks someone forgot to proofread the title. Actually buying the K5IIs gets you a rebate on the K-mount FA Limiteds when purchased at the same time. Buying the 645D gets you a rebate on the 645-mount DA 25mm or DFA 90mm macro, and a free 645 DA 55mm.