-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Finally upgrading my D40 to...
- Thread starter Allan Brown
- Start date
N
neil holmes
Guest
HiCan't find a review of this yet. Same amount(and quality) of noise as the K-7?
--
David~
WSSA Member #90
. . . shoot like there's no film in the thing!
Probably not.
The sensor in the K-X is the same (or a close relation) Sony sensor as in the Nikon D90/D300 and 12mp.
The K-7 uses a Samsung one with more mp.
Pics from it so far (though out of focus etc as usually happns with early samples from most brands...wonder why that is??) seem to show it will be great at high iso and maybe a stop better than the K-7.
K-7 would be my choice if I wanted an outdoor camera or for anything BUT indoors low light....since indoor low low light is most of my photography, I am looking forward to getting a K-X in a few weeks.
IF (and that is a big IF), it lives up to the spec and it had a Nikon badge instead of Pentax it would probably be one of the best selling dslrs of all time....since it does not it will just be Pentaxes best selling.
neil
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26884588@N00/
Allan Brown
Senior Member
And Just where is this fine gentleman located? Obviously you did not research as much as you thought.
I never said the lenses could not be modified, just not around here - where I am located!
But, perhaps you still have a problem with reading. Even with this modification, which Nikon will give me In-Body IS and allow for trap focusing?
The Pentax will.
So why are you still on it. I started this thread to show what is out there and available at a reasonable cost (the Pentax). People may say this is not for them, but what have you said?
Allan
Allan Brown
Senior Member
No, although it does look as this is the case.
Yes, it is mounted upside-down. The point of the exercise is to use my primes wide open or 1 stop down. So, being upside down is not an issue.Looks like the lens is mounted upside down, so you will have turn the camera on its head to see what aperture is set.
Pentax have the lens release lever at the grip side. I am very surprised if it mounts at all without an adapter. In that respect I suspect there is some trolling going on here...At least I would be worried about damaging something in the camera or on the lens. Stop down levers would almost certainly mot match.
Yes, the meter is in stop-down mode. The Pentax will meter properly at whatever aperture you have set, you just may not be able to see through the lens if you choose something like f22. See my comment above.
As I pointed out on a previous post, that will still not give me In-Body IS or allow for trap focusing.
Allan
Allan Brown
Senior Member
Yea - with blue polka dots
Allan
L
lee lindquist
Guest
And, the answer to that is "So what?" Are there no package services
that service your area? No post office?
Previously, you posted a link to a $69 adapter to allow Nikon lenses to
mount on canon bodies. Is that available "near you"?
Most people, if they were interested in such a thing would simply buy
it from some online vendor, and have it shipped. Not sit at home and
cry that it's not available "around here".
Allan Brown
Senior Member
OK now you are really being very silly.
There is a huge difference between buying an adaptor off Ebay and sending your lens via a post office or what ever, across the border, having it modified, sent back across the border and hope that the posties didn't break it on either journey. Then trying to convince the customs on either side of what you are trying to do so they don't charge duty.
And as I have said many times - HOW DOES THIS GIVE ME IN-BODY IS AND TRAP FOCUSING?
I give up on trying to have a sensible discussion with you as it seems you have no common sense and just argue silly points.
Allan
design7
Leading Member
In this new economy of lowered expectations, I decided to stop amassing camera "stuff." I sold all my old Takumar lenses and adapter rings and the endless collection of camera bodies that was gathering in my closet. I now have one camera, a Nikon D60, and two lenses, the excellent 18-55mm VR kit lens and the 55-200mm VR. It works for me. I now focus on getting great results rather than searching endlessly for the next adapter or compatible body. I do not miss the fabled image quality of old prime lenses. I have a lightweight kit that works with minimal fuss. Set yourselves free!
--
Frugal Nikon d40, D60 photography at http://abqstyle.com
--
Frugal Nikon d40, D60 photography at http://abqstyle.com
L
lee lindquist
Guest
Then simply buy the parts, for as little as $10 on eBay.
I can't understand why if the old lenses you have are not worth a $10 investment,
they would be worth buying a $69 adapter for.
I've said nothing at all about Pentax. You made a claim about canon, which
is what I responded to. How does using your $69 adapter offer in-body-is
and trap focus.
Thank god. I'd given up on that with you allan back on the thread about
Canon "G" remotes.
You keep replying to my posts and saying "Why are you still here?"
Too funny.
NowHearThis
Veteran Member
I know this is an old post.... but I wanted to clarify a couple of things:
Not sure what page it was discussed on, but this book will show you how to do it.
NHT
while ( ! ( succeed = try() ) );
True, the old Nikkors won't meter on the D40 but all the newer lenses will. My D40 has metered just fine with every lens I've ever thrown on it.
In body IS; I really like stabilized viewfinders, but that's just me (maybe a few million others). Ideally it would be nice for someone to come up with a dual system, but sadly, I don't see that happening for some time.
The D40 can do trap focusing:
Not sure what page it was discussed on, but this book will show you how to do it.
It's not. No one knows if it'll be better or worse as well.
To each his/her own.
I hope you enjoy your new gear, but it's not what I'd want.
--
NHT
while ( ! ( succeed = try() ) );
MightyMike
Forum Pro
And that is where you're just silly... the canon part to the original post was half a sentence and not really the point of the post and you went all niggly and made a huge issue out of the fact that the word canon was mentioned...
You remind me of the people that see a review go to the end of the review and then complain about the reviewers comments without even reading the review for themselves... picking such a small part of the original post and blowing it as much as you have is just ridiculous and it just goes to show all you wanted to do was be argumentative.
the canon part to his post is a none issue and therefore doesn't require you to get all pissy about it unless of course you're a seriously obnoxious fanboy and hate the mere mention of canon.
--
Mike from Canada
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote'
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=
You remind me of the people that see a review go to the end of the review and then complain about the reviewers comments without even reading the review for themselves... picking such a small part of the original post and blowing it as much as you have is just ridiculous and it just goes to show all you wanted to do was be argumentative.
the canon part to his post is a none issue and therefore doesn't require you to get all pissy about it unless of course you're a seriously obnoxious fanboy and hate the mere mention of canon.
--
Mike from Canada
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote
'
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=
L
lee lindquist
Guest
Gee MightyMike, you really need to read a little more carefully.
(I'm being polite here -- Allan what have said something like:
"Can't you read english?")
Allan clearly posted links to canon info, and then claimed that
I hadn't read his proof.
There were several posts about the canon adapter. Perhaps you
missed them, as you were late to the party. You'd probably enjoy
them, as something I remembered incorrectly was corrected by others.
And Mike, I guess you're not going to be backing up any of your earlier
comments -- you know about how I don't know the value of the stuff
in my junk drawer, and why I should choose it over current gear.
This is the paragraph I am referring to:
"The fact that you have old lenses sitting in a junk drawer suggests you don't take care of them much, and with that little respect for perfectly good equipment shows you really don't know the value of some of this older glass and why it can be preferred over the newer glass."
Obviously, those earlier comments of yours about the value and
utility of my old gear were just complete bs.
MightyMike
Forum Pro
I did say original post which is the one you initially took exception too, not the later posts in response to your exceptions...
as for the worth well i thought that there was no point in continuing that line, i made my point, you made yours and i don't care to argue it further, just agree to disagree.
--
Mike from Canada
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote'
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=
as for the worth well i thought that there was no point in continuing that line, i made my point, you made yours and i don't care to argue it further, just agree to disagree.
--
Mike from Canada
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote
' http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=
Allan Brown
Senior Member
My new lenses meter, auto focus and work just fine on my D40. I have the 18-55 II and the 70-300 VR - a very versatile lens. I am not getting rid of these.
However, I do have several primes that I want to use. With some of these, there are no AFS versions to work with the D40 series.
Exactly. Nikon will not provide in-body IS any time soon. I was going to buy another D40 or perhaps the D3000 (I like small cameras) but then I discovered the K-x. This is what the D40 should have evolved into. The huge advantage is that in-body cameras will stabilize any lens, not just those that have VR. Yes, I do like stabilized viewfinders also.
I can see the advantage of in-lens stabilizers, but that feature is useless if your lens doesn't have VR e.g the new 50mm f1.4 and the 35mm f1.8
What have we had so far? D40x, D60, D5000, D3000. None of these are really any improvement over the D40. A new feature here, a few MP here. Pentax comes out with the likes of the K-x.
With the AFS lenses, but not with the manual glass.
This is where you predetermine the focus point and press the shutter. When the subject comes into the focus field, the camera will take the photo.
The D40, unless in manual focus mode, always has to have the subject in focus before it will take a photo. When you mount an old lens, you are forced to set the camera to manual. This negates any possible focus trapping. This is not true of other Nikons or other cameras.
Everything I read says it is or the same family. What did you read that says it is not?
I understand the engine will be different but people on the Pentax forum are saying it will be good for high ISO's. This is what I want to go with my primes.
Allan
L
lee lindquist
Guest
So, I went back and read through some of this crap for fun...
This is the part I missed previously:
is a find place for things like that.
And, other than being snotty, what was the point of this comment,
as you seem to agree on the limited value of the lens:
35 is what is engraved on the lens barel. The 5 is in a slightly smaller font.
This is the part I missed previously:
Exactly -- a dime a dozen is a fair characterization. Seems like the junk drawer
is a find place for things like that.
And, other than being snotty, what was the point of this comment,
as you seem to agree on the limited value of the lens:
Allan Brown
Senior Member
Since all the "crap" was from you (others were trying to have a sensible discussion) I feel sorry for you that you felt the need.
Really sad.
Anyway I bought the K-x and have all the features I originally mentioned - Metering, Trap Focusing, Stabilizing etc.
End of discussion. If others who have old Pre-Ai Nikkors, they may wish to investigate this concept.
Allan
MightyMike
Forum Pro
You're a sorry excuse for a person if you've got nothing better to do then to go back reading through the old crap you posted and find it fun. So what was it, you couldn't find another post where there was 2 words out of a whole post that you could b!tch about? You know, totally hijacking a post based solely on half a sentence that had no real importance to the actual subject of the post. Man up, stop trying to find petty reasons to argue just because you're insecure and you think arguing will make it look like you aren't.
--
Mike from Canada
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote'
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=
--
Mike from Canada
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote
' http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=
As we have seen with the D5000, you can mount any Nikkor lens ever made on that body, so Nikon has the ability to do more, however is not giving the majority of Nikon users the same or better.
Allan Brown
Senior Member
Exactly. I can mount all my Pre-Ai lenses on my D40 and, while they work well, there is no metering. Ever since the D40 came out and people discovered it could mount the old lenses without having to modify the lens, they have been asking for a meter. There are now 4 successors to the D40 and still no meter.
That plus the in-body IS is a real K-x selling point for me.
Allan
L
lee lindquist
Guest
Mike, I thought you said you were through with this thread.
My mistake for believing you.
As I said, I missed the part where you said the lens was worth
"a dime a dozen".
It made everything else you wrote in the thread foolish.
Like you.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum