BarnabyJones: Despite what the official website states, TTL passthrough does not work with Olympus. Tested on the E-m1 with both the FL-600r & Metz 58 AF-2. Additionally, flash profiling is quite limited so unless you're with Nikon or Canon odds are your flashes won't be compatible.
I'm not seeing where they claim TTL pass through works for Olympus. To have any hope of working, the pins on the hotshoe would need to be in the correct physical location to make contact.
The remote power control feature will work with an Olympus camera though, or Fuji, or Panasonic, or Leica, or Holga, or Samsung, or Sigma.... Anything with a center pin for sending a sync command, it's just the flashes that mount of the receiving unit will need to support analog Canon, Nikon or Pentax TTL. It's using the quench timings to achieve output power control.
Polytropia: "FluCard" ... really? What's next, the "AIDScard" ...?
Someone in the Pentax marketing department needs to find another job.
I think the idea was to go with something catchy sounding like the *ist DL2
So instead of paying 50 bucks, a month to have my credit card stolen, now I can have it stolen for only 10 bucks a month? Where do I sign up?
Pixnat2: But arguing in DPR Forums cancels it all ;-)
Hahahaha!! It true!!
olypan: Great camera. Terrible lenses.
LOL! Because we all know that the only true measure of a lens is how it's handles 2 dimensional test charts.
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.